Network News

In an award-winning journalism career spanning nearly three decades, Glenn Kessler has covered foreign policy, economic policy, the White House, Congress, politics, airline safety and Wall Street. He was The Washington Post's chief State Department reporter for nine years, traveling around the world with three different Secretaries of State. Before that, he covered tax and budget policy for The Washington Post and also served as the newspaper's national business editor. More »

More Incoming Fire For Clinton

By
Michael Dobbs

CBS News report, March 24, 2008.

UPDATE Monday 8:50 P.M.
As has now been conclusively established by video film and news photographs, Hillary Clinton did NOT come under sniper fire in Bosnia in March 1996 when she made a morale-boosting visit to U.S. troops enforcing the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement. But she is taking plenty of bullets for her over-dramatic accounts of the trip, and acknowledged on Monday that she had made a "misstatement." She said it should be treated as a "minor blip."

Now let me tell you what I can remember, OK -- because what I was told was that we had to land a certain way and move quickly because of the threat of sniper fire. So I misspoke -- I didn't say that in my book or other times but if I said something that made it seem as though there was actual fire -- that's not what I was told. I was told we had to land a certain way, we had to have our bulletproof stuff on because of the threat of sniper fire. I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this 8-year-old girl and, I can't, I can't rush by her, I've got to at least greet her -- so I made a -- I took her stuff and then I left, Now that's my memory of it...No, I went to 80 countries, you know. I gave contemporaneous accounts, I wrote about a lot of this in my book. You know, I think that, a minor blip, you know, if I said something that, you know, I say a lot of things -- millions of words a day -- so if I misspoke, that was just a mistatement.

Last week was not the first time that Clinton talked about sniper fire in Bosnia. She has provided various different versions of the incident along the campaign trail and in her autobiography, Living History. See, for example, this New York Times account of a campaign rally in Waco, Tex., on February 29, at which Clinton said that the welcoming ceremony had to be "moved inside" a Tuzla airport building "because of sniper fire." She made a similar statement in Dubuque, Iowa, back in December.

After my post last week examining Clinton's claims, I received messages and calls from several readers, providing very different accounts of the scene at Tuzla Air Force base that dank March morning. U.S. Air Force journalist Don Jackson was standing on the back of a flatbed pick-up truck filming the event when Clinton's plane touched down. Here is his account:

Mrs. Clinton arrived to a flight line full of well-wishers, both military and civilian, accompanied by her staff as well as comedian Sinbad and singer Sheryl Crow who were there to entertain troops. To set the record straight, there was no enemy fire, and no imminent danger. If there had been any danger, "well-wishers" would not have been allowed on the tarmac, much less allowing me to stand above everyone else on the back of a truck. And Sinbad and Sheryl Crow would've been running for their lives instead of taking the time to be interviewed by yours truly, on the tarmac. Mrs. Clinton's [claim] is a lie, plain and simple.

CBS News has now posted the full version of the truncated report by correspondent Sharyl Attkisson about the arrival ceremony in Tuzla that has been circulating on YouTube. You can see it below.

In a blog posting here, Attkisson shares her memories about the trip. She recalls that the pilots made a steep, very fast descent into Tuzla "to minimize exposure to hostile fire on the ground," but adds that there were "no known incidents of enemy fire on our aircraft." (This kind of landing is not the same as the "corkscrew landing" described by Clinton in some of her speeches. You can see an example of a corkscrew landing here.) Attkisson adds:

The mood upon first landing at the Tuzla airport was light. Children were there on the tarmac to greet the first lady, Chelsea was by her side, Bosnian dignitaries had gathered: It felt safe...To be sure, it was not the "safest" trip for a First Lady to take: there were serious risks in traveling to Bosnia, even for the President's wife under the vigilant protection of the U.S. military. It took some guts for her to go. But I don't recall, and did not note, any close calls on this trip with sniper fire or any other dangers.

Video clips of a smiling Clinton walking across the tarmac, and bending down to greet an eight-year-old Bosnian girl, are proliferating on YouTube. In some cases, the images have been juxtaposed with her harrowing account about running for cover "with our heads down." Here is one such effort that had received nearly 100,000 hits by Monday morning.

Sometimes, in politics, it is the trivial mistakes rather than the major policy blunders that can trip you up.

Clinton has shown herself to be completely amateurish in using this Bosnia trip in her campaign, or else she is utterly deluded in thinking that shots actually were fired at her. Clinton ought to have known that people would pounce on her mischaracterizations, and she ought to have known that the First Lady's trip to a war-torn Bosnia would have a paper and video trail stretching into the sunset.

Clinton really deserves whatever negative political fallout she gets from this one. She told a whopper, and a savvy, experienced politician should have known better. As much as the absurdity of her story, the fact that the whole matter tears away at her self-constructed image as an experienced, vetted political operator hurts her credibility badly.

What is even worse, as long as this story keeps getting play in the press, Obama doesn't even have to look like the bad guy for attacking Clinton over it.

I also wouldn't be surprised to see someone put ads on the air in Pennsylvania along the same basic lines as the YouTube video--images of Clinton in Bosnia with a voice-over of her outlandish speech. At the end, pose a question on screen about whether or not this is the person we want as commander-in-chief. Devastating.

If used to effect by her opponents, this may well be Clinton's Dukakis-in-the-tank or Kerry-windsurfing moment, showing her as goofy, out-of-touch, and, to go beyond Dukakis and Kerry, completely dishonest.

No wonder the latest Gallup poll showed 53% of the American people do not find Hillary Clinton honest and trustworthy. Her Bosnia story is simply a flat-out lie of egregious proportions, and is part of a larger pattern of evasions, exaggerations, distortions, and untruths that has not escaped the public's attention.

It is unbearably sad as to what extreme the clinton's have shown us that they are willing to go to any extreme to re-occupy the white house. I am a proud democrat and i once held the clinton's in high regard and with the utmost respect. unfortunately this image of the once most loved,trustworthy and highly respected family in politics has painfully been deleted from the minds and hearts of most democrats. very sad indeed.

For Bill Clinton, he starts to point his finger. Straight up! Whenever you find Bill Clinton lying or playing with the truth, most of time he is shaking his finger at the audience.

For Hillary Clinton, she looks around constantly at an 135 degree angle, back-and-forth, while she embellishes the truth. She does this to look into the the crowd to find a face that seems to believe her which reinforces the lie.

Being honest or dishomest is the mantras for the Clintons, I think the American people love them when they are dishonest. and will vote for her. Pre se more than 98% of Americans are dishonest and untrustworthy. So no big deal for the Clintons to play the harp..

McCain also mislead the public, saying his visit to a Bagdad market was safe, when he was protected troops and helicopters as he spent 10 minutes buying a falafal. It seems to me there is just one candidate left who beleives truth is the best policy.

This is literally raising my blood pressure. WHY, WHY, WHY is no one reporting on this other than the Washington Post. Both candidates have been guilty of bending the truth. But these post articles and the YouTube video exposes her sniper fire comments MUCH, MUCH, MORE than stretching the truth. Why is no one else picking up on this?

Tim Russert, on "Meet the Press" Sunday, referred to this story too -- so, it's more than just WaPo -- even though I wouldn't vote for Hillary Clinton in a million years, I do see her point in that severe security measures were in place. She never said "I was shot at" (neither has George W. Bush ever admitted in public that a handgrenade was thrown at him once). There's plenty more to use against Hillary DIANE Clinton than this.

The funniest thing about this wonderful account of heroism by Sen. Clinton is just that, the Mainstream media in America has not jumped on it as they did when Sen. Obama called his grand mother "Typical White Woman". Now this tells us about the Mainstream media in America. Where ever America is today its as a result of the Media, who are so biased to the extent of not telling themselves the truth. Its so shameful that, some of people the in the media still talk about "Intergrity". I really do not know how Americans or Democrats for that matter, would think twice about voting for Sen. Obama, when they have a candidate who makes up such a story, which can be verified. What would she be as a President of the United State or a Democratic Party nominee for the Presidency? Voters should just know now that, there is nothing Sen. Clinton must have said in the course of this Campaign, which is worth holding on, because as we can see she would not mind doing anything to win an Election and when she does win? What happens? I have lost all the respect I had for this woman and I wish the Mainstream Media, should just know that they are the voice of the Americans and they should start asking questions about Sen. Clintons intergrity.... She is just a blatant LIAR.

You pepole are deranged. You jump all over the best president this country has had in a long time, and a woman who has worked hard for years for the benefit of working people, just to justify your support of a man who has done absolutely nothing. Tell us what he has done, don't nitpick minor campaign speeches. God!

Thank you for doing this research into Senator Clinton's claims. I am thinking that she felt at liberty making such false statements because she thought her attorneys would be able to stall the release of documents until after she had obtained the nomination.

Didn't the US involvement in Viet Nam start after claims of an attack that never happened? Didn't the Iraq war start over claims of WMD's and ties to Bin Laden that didn't exist?

If anything convinces me that the Clintons should not be back in the White House this clinches it. That is all America needs is another Administration that creates war stories for their own personal political objectives.

This embellished account of the dangers are just a sad example of why the American people want change. We have had so many lies during the Bush administration that we have grown cynical and stayed home from the polls.

I give Senator Obama high marks for avoiding the low road in this campaign. He has not made the Bill Clinton legacy a talking point of the campaign even though most Democrats blame Bill for Al Gore's struggles to win the election against George Bush.

If Hillary gets the nomination, her own words will be used to paint her as untrustworthy and Bill's personal behavior will be back on front pages again.

The super delegates have go to be considering that this dynasty is not good for the future of the party. Democrats who want to run for open seats in the Senate have an opportunity to select a candidate who will bring new voters to the polls.

Obama supporters are not anti-Hillary as much as they are realistic about the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton domination of politics. We can not change Washington until we embrace a new generation of leadership.

With the Obama-McCain race, we have no Bush or Clinton on the ticket. That is the change we need so that Americans can hope for different thinkers at all levels of the government.

Bush loyalists like Al Gonzales represent eight years of failure. Clinton loyalists like Bill Richardson believe that they can pledge allegiance to the United States of America rather than to a political family. His example is the kind of change we need.

I think this is an intentional sucker punch..the Clinton campaign knows it's a fabrication and is just daring media to show the clip over and over of her on an "important mission." It doesn't matter about ethics from where these folks are coming from..it's become a hazing ritual to be tough enough to stand up there and spin with the best of them..I lie, you lie..Detante!

If one does not mischaracterize Sen Clinton's statements, the only one that appears contradicted is the "run to the cars" one. I expect we'll discover that statement referred to an event other than the one depicted in that news footage. As for the others:

"evasive maneuver" - stipulated by all parties, even if it was not a "corkscrew landing", a claim she never made.

"under sniper fire" - if her security told her there was a threat of sniper fire, then she is perfectly truthful. She never claimed to witness actual firing.

"no greeting ceremony" - shaking a few hands and giving a hug does not constitute a "greeting ceremony". As a matter of fact, the news report includes footage of an indoor meeting with a group. Could that meeting have been moved indoors for security purposes? Perhaps. Does Dobbs find out before he calls a US Senator a liar? Of course not. It IS Sen Clinton, after all.

=========
Atkisson, from the contemporaneous news report: "First wife of a president to visit troops in a hostile zone"

A "hostile zone"? But isn't this whole "fact check" and accusation of lying (4 "pinnocchios") based on it not being a "hostile zone"? Oh, who cares, this is fun, right, Michael? I mean, you get cited in right wing commercials. A proud moment, I'm sure.

To JakeD, who simply wrote: "Barack HUSSEIN Obama will not be sworn in as President on January 20, 2009."

If your only critique of Barack Obama is that his given name is "Hussein," then you reveal much about yourself. Specifically, it's evident that you have little going for you right now, if ever. Your childish approach to politics probably demonstrates the need for you to act out from being teased as a child - maybe for your name. I mean, "JakeD"....hmmm, hahaha, now I'm guessing what the "D" stands for. So sad. You are one more reason to raise awareness about the effects of child abuse.

To JakeD, who simply wrote: "Barack HUSSEIN Obama will not be sworn in as President on January 20, 2009."

If your only critique of Barack Obama is that his given name is "Hussein," then you reveal much about yourself. Specifically, it's evident that you have little going for you right now, if ever. Your childish approach to politics probably demonstrates the need for you to act out from being teased as a child - maybe for your name. I mean, "JakeD"....hmmm, hahaha, now I'm guessing what the "D" stands for. So sad. You are one more reason to raise awareness about the effects of child abuse.

The usual Clinton apologists (svreader, iowatreasures, ChristianLeft, thinker, AsperGirl, etc.) are not touching this one with a ten-foot pole; the overwhelming evidence to the contrary will make them look almost as foolish as Clinton spinning this lie out of her mouth in the first place!

The "D" stands for my last name: Dort. By all means, please make fun of it all you want -- I am not making fun of Obama's name nor is it a critique at all -- in fact, I think it means "handsome". Next question?

By the way, does anyone think a civilian passenger can tell whether an evasive landing is a corkscrew or not? Does Mr Dobbs know that someone with the First Lady at the time didn't imply or mischaracterize the landing as a "corkscrew" and plant that entirely trivial, inconsequential, meaningless misunderstanding so that a hack like Mr Dobbs could make a mountain out of nothing 12 years later? I don't think so.

As a person who voted for Bill Clinton twice, I am continually disappointed by the lengths to which they are willing to stoop to ensure their return to the White House. There are things that people shouldn't even have to lie about, but here we have it. Even in instances where she can and should take the high road, she surrounds herself with surrogates who can't or won't. Now we have this whopper--so easily verifiable. Don't even get me started on her throwing a member of her own party under the bus to prop up a man who said such hateful and cruel things about her own child.

I don't know what is wrong with the people who think it is ok that politicians like Hillary Clinton lie to the country. We pay huge portions of our income in taxes and these politicians spend the money. I would think it would be important that the people spending our taxes are honest. None of us would accept this from anyone else. What is wrong with you people? The truth matters and lie cost you your hard earned money.

Why am I not surprised to see that Hillary has lied again? She lies about the Michigan and Florida primaries. She could have removed her name from the Michigan ballot as did the other legitimate candidates, but she knew that she would appear to "win" if no one else was on the ballot. She said at the time of the Iowa votes that the primaries in Michigan and Florida would not count. She is trying every way she can to bend or change the rules to her advantage. So it is no surprise to see that, once again, she is caught in a lie. She says she is now opposed to NAFTA although in her senate campaign she told about how good it was working. She will do anything, say anything to get nominated, even destroy the Democratic party.

The Clintons have repeatedly proven themselves to be as tenacious as they come. I felt that such tenacity was justified in the effort to repudiate attempts by Ken Starr and the right-wing smear machine to do-in Clinton's second term, but I now think that I have given them both too much credit.

Hillary's silly over-exaggeration sounds like Al Gore's alleged invention of the internet: it was a stupid and pointless playground-style exaggeration when a frank account of her actual foreign policy experience (doubtless considerable) would have been more than sufficient.

I and many others I know had been on the fence until these examples of truth-stretching and gutter politics started to emerge from Hillary and her advisors. The Clintons need to retire these tired tactics and stick to business. At least then we will have had an honest debate.

"Sometimes, in politics, it is the trivial mistakes rather than the major policy blunders that can trip you up"?

Mistake? Getting caught in a lie was Hillary's mistake. She certainly didn't spin this tale by accident. It's part of a determined campaign to win the presidency by any means necessary. Get ready for more.

Are you SURE that the First Lady was never told to "run to the cars"?
__________________________________________
It's not our responsibility to prove that "they" didn't tell her (proving a negative), despite the fact that no one has stepped up and backed up the statement, while multiple people have disputed the whole claim; it's the responsibility of people like you to prove that someone did.

But you already knew that, right, Jake? The best you can do, as usual, is toss off one liners. BTW, How come you designated her as "the First Lady" instead of your usual moronic Hillary DIANE Clinton?

You guys need to give Hillary a break. While she may not have been dodging incomign sniper fire, she and Sinbad were constantly faced with the dire question of "are we going to eat here, OR AT THE NEXT PLACE??"

It's actually NONE of our responsibility to PROVE anything on a blog -- but you already knew that too, right -- also, I designated her as "the First Lady" because that's what she was during this particular episode. Next question?

Gion:

Do you have a link to the first speech she gave that says that they DID "run to the cars with their heads down"? I've only heard it as "we were told". Thanks in advance.

As is typical with this column, one is left wondering what "fact" is being "checked" exactly. Mr Dobbs has a tendency to quote a candidate, then characterize or interpret the quote, then "fact check" his characterization. This method undermines the credibility and utility of the column.

Sinbad's comments to the Washington Post on March 10th, calling into question Hillary's earlier accounts of the plane trip, created a ruckus as soon as they were published, and news of them spread throughout the news media and blogoshere almost immediately.

The Clinton campaign HAD to be aware of the new-found-doubt of Hillary's version of events, that was raised by the Sinbad story

From this point, THEY HAD SEVEN DAYS before Hillary Clinton's March 17th speech at George Washington University to look into the records of the flight and the landing ceremonies, both their own and those of news reports, AND CORRECT Clinton's highly erroneous earlier accounts.

But what did they do? Instead, they choose to not only stick with her original story, but actually ramped up its details. This decision was nothing less than an act of 100% premeditaed fraud.

"Mr Dobbs has a tendency to quote a candidate, then characterize or interpret the quote, then "fact check" his characterization"
=====================
For example:
Sen Clinton claims she was told there were threats in Bosnia, a "hostile zone", and security measures, including an evasive landing and limited outdoor exposure, were being taken in response.

Mr Dobbs adds his characterization that Sen Clinton claims to have been in personal danger.

Mr Dobbs builds a case for there not being danger to the Senator at that landing.

On the weight of his "evidence", Dobbs calls Sen Clinton a liar in front of God and everyone.

No one is saying that it's O.K. to lie -- what I am saying, at least, is that no one has PROVEN (JK5432's phrasing, not mine) that she "lied". Do you KNOW that she was not told to "run for the cars" on that trip?

Mr Dobbs and I have something in common. Neither of us knows what Sen Clinton was told regarding threats on that trip nor what security measures were being taken. We part ways when he takes an utterly inconsequential anecdote, exaggerates and mischaracterizes it, "proves" it may be false and accuses her of lying. I'm just not that reckless.

How in the world could anyone even dream of her being near the "football"? It takes a stable mind in this day and age and it's bad enough we as Americans are in a desperate way with our economy, first NAFTA,then IRELAND,now BOSNIA. Are there any truths with the Clintons? Mental hospitals have saner people than this institutionalized.

How in the world could anyone even dream of her being near the "football"? It takes a stable mind in this day and age and it's bad enough we as Americans are in a desperate way with our economy, first NAFTA,then IRELAND,now BOSNIA. Are there any truths with the Clintons? Mental hospitals have saner people than this institutionalized.

What's sad is that a genuinely honest person - Al Gore - got skewered for being dishonest; while a serial liar and hypocrite - Hillary - is getting a free pass. Up is down, black is white, the Clintons are good for America. Well, I don't believe it and neither should anyone with a soul or conscience.

One of the things Obama emphasizes often is the idea of getting away from the lies by Politicians who we know all too well will do ANYTHING to get elected, or to get backing for their unpopular wars. It is interesting that the Clinton campaign adviser, Harold Ickes, is the son of Harold Ickes senior, who as sec. of the interior under FDR, conspired with General Marshall and FDR to bait the Japanese into attacking Pearl Harbor. By not sharing their vast amount of intelligence about this with Commanders in Pearl, they were responsible for the thousands of deaths that resulted. However, they got what they wanted. Us in the war. Lies seem to be the easiest way to get what you want in a democracy. 911....Hhmmmmm

I was the Public Affairs Officer captain, US Army) for the 3/321st Infantry (Airborne) from Vicenza, Italy that was deployed to Bosnia during the time that President Clinton and the first lady visited. I was intimately involved with planning and executing their visit to the soldiers stationed there. I was even to appear with the president on a radio call-in show, but that was cancelled since they were almost three hours late in arriving.

I remember the occasion very well. There were unconfirmed reports of snipers in the area who had supposedly arrived from Afghanistan, but there had been NO reported sniper activity in the vicinity of Tuzla Airbase. If there had been I would have known about it, for I was on the staff of the 3/321st Infantry battalion commander, Lt. Col. Michael Scaparotti, who was charged with security at Tuzla Airbase.

The president's plane, with the first lady, arrived without incident except for running late on what was really a political trip being billed as a "foreign affairs" trip).

The presidents media people arrived at least a week ahead of the planned event and made it clear this was a public relations event. The entire visit, intended to appear spontaneous, was entirely scripted (staged) from beginning to end, with no possibility of anything occurring that would jeopardize the president and first lady's political image.

I repeat ... there was NO sniper fire, and not a credible threat of sniper activity in the immediate vicinity at the time of the
presidents' arrival.

Sadly, this is one in a string of recently revealed lies. Finally, the media is beginning to pay attention. Hillary's claim of leading the effort to enact the Children's Health Program (S-CHIP) is also a gross exageration:

The Globe reported that Kennedy patterned the S-CHIP plan after a Massachusetts program that started in 1996. Kennedy met with two Bay State health-care advocates, Dr. Barry Zuckerman of Boston Medical Center and John McDonough, then a Democratic state legislator.

McDonough said Kennedy developed the national S-CHIP concept after that meeting.

"I don't recall any signs of Mrs. Clinton's engagement," said McDonough, who has not endorsed a presidential candidate. "I'm sure she was behind the scenes, engaged in lobbying, but it is demonstrably not the case" that she was a driving force behind the bill.

"I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia," she said, in remarks that aides described Monday as not being part of her prepared speech. "I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

Hillary made a mistake, she thought she was in Bosnia surrounded by sniper fire but actually she was in OBAMALAND. So at least you could excuse her.

You know in OBAMALAND, trash and manure are plentiful that you are always in danger. There are too many lunatics and crackpots . You can get killed not by bullets or grenades but by vile and dirt spewing from the mouths of of those fanatics.

It was a treacherous night landing. Ice had formed on both of our wings, and as I looked out the port window, I could see it cracking, flying off into the night sky with each near barrel roll of our C-50, highlighted by the flares shooting past on either side of the cabin, turning them into falling prisms of wildly careening light.

As the cabin lurched back and forth and the sounds of rocket fire percussed the urgent, faltering rhythm of our right engine, I unfastened my seat belt, and, finding my center of gravity, rose from my seat, moving past aides frozen still in their seats, arms locked like girders against their arm rests in terror, and walked up the center aisle to the pilot's cabin.

"How long to Kosovo"? I shouted over the screaming whine of the altimeter's alarm, marking our steep descent. The pilot turned, looked at me in shocked recognition--"How...how did you make it up here? No one has ever walked up here in these conditions before! How..."

"Never mind that!" I barked, with what I hoped was not too much stern forcefulness, with sufficient steel and empathy combined into a firm imperturbability. "Check the master FMC! Is it working or has it failed?"

The pilot, paused, as if in amazement at my readiness , and then himself awakening to crisis, looked to the Control Display Unit . "It's down! It's down!" he shouted. A bead of sweat began to form on his brow.

I knew what I had to do. "Get out of there!" I commanded, and pulled him from the seat, where he crumbled to a fetal position on the floor behind me. Stepping over him, I took the chair behind the console.

"Check the Central Maintenance Computers and activate the NAV RAD for alternate radio tuning capability!" I shouted to the co-pilot. He, too, had broken down in tears, his head buried in his hands. I looked to his ID on the console. Another newbie.

Well, this was another one where I would have to go it alone.

Quickly, I tore the scarf from my neck and fashioned it into a crude lasso that could be used for EFIS/EICIS control. Catching the lever with my right hand, I activated the cabin loudspeaker with my left. I knew that they had likely been gulled by the earlier soft patter of the pilot. "Brace yourself! Get ready! These aren't just words!" Then I pulled the lever back hard, sending us rocketing towards the runway.

"You'll never make it!" I knew that voice, and turned. Richardson! How did he trundle up to the cabin? "Out of here, Judas! And take that quivering beard with you!"

I could feel bolts straining against Pennsylvania steel as I pushed the '50 down, down, down to the ground below us. Suddenly, an explosion punctuated the sky--Hand held rocket fire at 3' o'clock!

I quickly performed the evasive maneuvers that I had learned for so long, and so well. My face became angry, then sad, then gentle, then intensely serious, then was finally rocked by a powerful squealing, an unnatural burst of laughter. That did it! The rocket exploded harmlessly behind us.

Now. Now it was time to take the stick and bring this shaking, careening flight, parts straining against themselves until nearly ready to burst, down to the ground. I put my arms to the twin arms of the FO-AP, set the APC, and with all of the strength remaining in me, began to push the levers down. Straining, I pushed harder. And harder. I could see the runway rising before us in the glare shield. I would have to find the remaining strength to bring it down.

Finally, as if a burst of superhuman might had been somehow delegated to me, I pushed the levers into locked position. I could hear Penn in the cabin shouting "We're landing...We're going down!" as I felt the rough shock of the landing gear snapping into place.

Sparks flew as we hit the runway, bullets ricocheting off of the cabin, one wheel touching pavement. I looked straight through the windshield--the militia, arms at the ready stood at the runway's end. The last obstacle.

I turned the craft hard, sending it hurtling sideways across the pavement. It swept the militia away in a single screaming motion that combined with the screaming that arose from the cabin, as we continued to hurtle towards the small, makeshift terminal, where the dignitaries, negotiators, and heads of state awaited for my arrival.

I did not close my eyes. I did not let go of the wheel. I watched--as we ground to a halt just before the doors of the terminal.

I looked fore, at the dignitaries protecting themselves from the sniper fire that raged around them. I looked aft, at the passengers, shaken but safe.

We had arrived. All was good.

Just a moment...

Due to the discovery of a video of the above described occasion, I would like to make few small corrections. The flight was in fact actually a regularly scheduled Continental Airlines flight that was actually flown by the pilot and co-pilot--although the pilot did have a cold, and during the flight, I did at several times give serious attention to our flight conditions (notes indicate that I found it "a bit bumpy") I would also note that the dinner, Salmon with Creamed Potatoes, was undercooked, and was served with a Riesling that was unusually dry. It is also true that we were met not by a militia but by a girl's youth soccer team. However, it was necessary for me to dodge a soccer ball as team members demonstrated their often aggressive skills. No other shots were fired.

The clarity with which she spoke about the "facts", makes it obvious she was not misspeaking or even to use a Bushism "misremembering". She was flat out lying to pad her "national security credentials."

I was walking down the street minding my own business when I was attacked by a huge, wild, Bengal tiger. Thinking quickly, I reached into my purse, took out my cell phone and dialed 911. While waiting for help I grabbed the tiger''s head, squeezed his mouth shut, and, before he could react I slapped him a few times. And just as he showed his fangs and tried to bite me . . . Oh Oh, I misspoke. It was really my daughter''s one-month old kitten, she wanted to play with a piece of yarn I had. But it did look vicious.

I have lived in United States for 10 years, an I was a child of a civil war in Bosnia, I re-call no sniper fire in Tuzla during March of 96. The fighting have ended in late 95, and besides TUZLA was controled under Bosnian-Muslim Forces almost the whole war...

Hillary once told a group of people that her mother had named her after the famous adventurer, Sir Edmund Hillary - the Mount Everest climber. (It was during a trip to Nepal that she made this comment)

She subsequently repeated the story, and it even made it into Bill's autobiography!

Problem is, Sir Edmund wasn't famous or even known by ANYONE when Hillary Clinton was born... she just clean made it up!

Why?

It really is hard to tell why she does this. Why make up something like that, just to impress people?

Why exaggerate the Bosnia thing? The news report already called it "groundbreaking" that she was in "hostile" territory... why embellish?

I suspect she just can't help herself. She has been caught out time and time again with these lies... more will soon follow.

This just in- Kwame Kilpatrick, having been indicted for a felony count of perjury for lying about having an affair with an aide, has now said that he mis-spoke himself. Word is that charges will be dropped.( why not ? It works for the white woman). Maybe Hillary mis-spoke herself in one of those big blue states with a low percentage of blacks and no caucus. That would make it all right.

"I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this 8-year-old girl and, I can't, I can't rush by her, I've got to at least greet her -- so I made a -- I took her stuff and then I left, Now that's my memory of it.."

Latest version! "I took her stuff and left." An 8-year-old? These are Hillary's credentials to be Commander-in-Chief? Her International Experience? "I took her stuff and left."

"I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this 8-year-old girl and, I can't, I can't rush by her, I've got to at least greet her -- so I made a -- I took her stuff and then I left, Now that's my memory of it.."

Latest version! "I took her stuff and left." An 8-year-old? These are Hillary's credentials to be Commander-in-Chief? Her International Experience? "I took her stuff and left."

"I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this 8-year-old girl and, I can't, I can't rush by her, I've got to at least greet her -- so I made a -- I took her stuff and then I left, Now that's my memory of it..."

That's her account AFTER seeing the video yesterday and that isn't even accurate.

Her original claim was that she visited a war zone that was too dangerous for the President yet the war had been over for 3 months and the President had visited 2 or 3 months before her visit.

How much "experience" does this visit contribute to handling foreign policy? Aren't privates in the US marines more experienced in this area? The CBS report said that in the 70 minutes of meetings using an interpreter (35 minutes of actual dialogue), she listened to community leaders talk about the hardships of war - no foreign policy discussion.

The war had been over for three months and there were no major foreign policy issues to discuss or decide. Pat Nixon visited Saigon and Barbara Bush visited Desert Storm so this wasn't even that unique for a First Lady. Therefore, if this trip stands out as evidence of her foreign policy experience, what does that say about her foreign policy experience overall in light of her other exaggerations on Macedonia, Ireland and the suspect Rwanda story?

Using the examples she has provided, she's basically telling us that she doesn't have a lot of foreign policy experience by getting caught grossly exaggerating her role while telling voters that she has this experience. Some pundits are passing this off as a trivial exaggeration. I'm not convinced.

Now lets see, which is worst a liar or man who attends a church with a minister we don't like? Like the Clintonista always say, "words do matter." Even more so when they are your own words and not those of your surrogates. Whether or not it is "fish story" this is one in a long line of "fish stories" she has been caught in. Let's see (1) SHE said she was instrumental in getting the health program SChip passed, the media and the senators who worked for passage of the bill provided proof she was not; (2) SHE said she was involved in negotiating peace in Ireland, the Irish leaders said she was not; (3)SHE said was a part of an important event in Bosnia that the press footage proved actually happened a month before she arrived; (4) SHE said she was involved in major policy decisions as first lady, when the records prove she did not have the security clearance to allow her be involved at this level. Fish Stories, Lies, Embellishments, Half-truths, Mispoken words. They all amount to the same thing. Another Clinton rewriting reality to suit them.

The real truth is that John Mc Cain is a REAL war hero and the GOP will play Hillary's Bosnia fantasy over and over again Mc Cain will beat her in a general election! Hillary is UNELECTABLE and if the MEDIA would STOP embellishing her chances to win the Democratic NOMINATION the public would know the truth that she is behind badly and has lost the Democratic Nomination!

"As Ms Attkisson put it in the contemporaneous news report:
"First wife of a president in recent history to visit troops in a hostile zone."

I believe this is the point, the rest is noise. Why is the "Fact Checker" at the Washington Post a noise maker?"

Oh please, give us a break, are you that blind or just that stupid? Once again we see that Dillary, just like her husband will unabashedly lie her azz off to get what she wants. The only "hostile zone" she ever encountered while Bill was in office was their White House bedroom.

People seem to think Hillary lied about her adventure in Bosnia . The fact that video tape supports the fact that in every particuliar her words are in direct contradiction to what we see on the tape. For those who believe thier lying eyes this might call into guestion most of what see claims to have done in secret during her time in the White House.

There is more innocent interpretation however. Hillary may just be talking "Clintonese" some examples

"I never had sex with that women"

" That all depends on what is is"

and Hillays lenthy desciption about her Bosnia adventure. In Clintonnese words mean exactly what the Clintons say no more no less.

The question is do we want a president who speaks a fluent Clinton or one who speaks English .Fact Checker fine job

This was an outright lie, plain and simple. The big picture is starting to unfold on why she won't release her 2007 tax returns, and why she is ducking from a April 19th debate. The complexity of the questions that she will be asked to answer are mounting...

"She did visit two outposts outside of the base camp in Tuzla without the
celebrities there
for the USO tour.
Protected by sharpshooters, Hillary Rodham Clinton swooped into a military
zone by Black
Hawk helicopter Monday to deliver a personal "thank you, thank you, thank
you" to U.S.
troops.
...
But this was a day of celebration and celebrities - a day for the U.S.
troops helping to
uphold the Bosnian peace accord. Mrs. Clinton hosted a USO show with
comedian Sinbad
and singer Sheryl Crow and briefly addressed the gathering.
...
But the highlight of her trip were visits to two fortified posts outside the
U.S. base in
Tuzla. Even President Clinton, restricted to the base by bad weather in
January, did not see
as much of this war-wracked region as Mrs. Clinton did Monday.
...
Riflemen rushed to the brush line as the helicopter landed and surrounded
her as she
walked into the post. Located in a "separation zone," the U.S. outpost
nestles between two
tree lines. Just months ago, one was Serbian territory, the other Bosnian.
Security was tight - fighter jets accompanied her C-17 cargo plane to Tuzla
- but officials
said the first lady took no extraordinary risks on the trip.
Lexis - By RON FOURNIER, Associated Press, March 25, 1996

Another report:

THE First Lady of the United States, Hillary Clinton, visited her country's
troops at their
fortified outposts in north-eastern Bosnia today and said their peacekeeping
work was
"extraordinary to behold".
Mrs Clinton's helicopter flight to Camp Alicia, home of a mechanised
infantry outfit and a
combat engineer batallion 15 miles east of Tuzla, took her over burned out
villages and
farm houses whose roofs had been blown off in the fierce fighting before
last December's
Paris peace agreement ended the 43 -month-old war in Bosnia.

A machine gun emplacement guarded the entrance of the outposts and marked
Bosnian
minefields were visible outside its perimeter.
...
After lunch with the troops in a makeshift dining hall surrounded by
sandbags, she flew
on to Camp Bedrock south of Tuzla to visit an army field hospital.

Mrs Clinton, who later returned to Tuzla for a show starring singer Sheryl
Crow and
comedian Sinbad, said she was "amazed at how much has been accomplished in
such a
short period of time" by US troops in Bosnia.
Source - Lexis - The Herald (Glasgow), March 26, 1996

And she did spend some time in the cockpit ;-)

So it was probably no accident that the C-17 pilot was a woman, Capt. Cheryl
Beineke of
Ohio. She is among just four female C-17 pilots out of about 100 in the Air
Force.
"I'm loving every minute of this," the pilot said after Mrs. Clinton spent
several minutes in
the cockpit.
Source - Lexis - By RON FOURNIER, AP International, March 25, 1996"

She misspoke huh? That's funny. I could have sworn she and her campaign blasted Sinbad a couple weeks ago for making fun of her claim that they were under sniper fire. He said the most dangerous thing they had to deal with was where to eat. HRC called a press conference to counter that assertion and brought in people to stake "irrefutably" that they had to "run for cover."

It seems Bills pinnochio syndrome has worn off on Hillary. They are truly the same when it comes to doing or saying whatever it takes to slide on by to make yourself look better. Not presidential at all.

Watch the video and you'll see that she actually believes this really happened. Her voice is full of conviction, her description of the "events" is detailed and compelling. But of course it didn't happen. Which means that she's delusional. She's not lying, she's crazy.

The press needs to do its job and call a lie a lie. As John McCain would say, a little straight talk. We've heard more than enough about comparative polls but I think the most interesting one would be who lies more--Bill or Hillary?

No one is saying that it's O.K. to lie -- what I am saying, at least, is that no one has PROVEN (JK5432's phrasing, not mine) that she "lied". Do you KNOW that she was not told to "run for the cars" on that trip?

______________________________________________________
The videos, the folks who were on the trip, etc. - I guess the fact that no one and nothing has confirmed her claim to have been told means that it could have happened, right, Jake? Why not just admit you were wrong and move on, Jake, (or just shut up - there's a radical concept) rather than continue to embarrass yourself by restating what everyone knows to have been a lie?

Misspeaking is getting the city you're in wrong when giving a stump speech; misspeaking is confusing someone's name when you're intorducing them to someone else. This was a flat out lie. Period. No amount of lipstick can gussie up this pig.

Now I'm really confused. You see, during this primary I have learned to hate Hillary's guts because I thought she was a masterful liar, Karl Rove-like. But now I see she's really not that good at making stuff up. I mean, what's the point of lying if you can't lie your way out of it when you get caught?

Now I don't know what to think about her qualifications to be president. She is still shameless, still lies, and still thinks she's fooling me. So maybe she's McCain's equal.

Boy oh boy, the Obamaites are in full force today with their bad mouthing and name calling. Why don't you and the media nincompoops focus on her Northern Ireland account ? Now that so many others have stepped forward with their support, you have nothing to gripe about except the tempest in a teapot over whether she was actually under sniper fire in Bosnia. The military commander in charge at the time said there was sniper fire in the mountains. That's enough for me
Do you want to have a first lady actually take fire?

What about Obama? He's barely been to Iraq, has no foreign policy experience and lied about his 20 year old association with Wright as well as all the extra money he took from Rezko. And he is not releasing his State Senate records. He has not held a single meeting of the Foreign Relations Committee since he became chair more than a year ago. And meantime he is taking a vacation in the Caribbean - strange timing, I bet to escape scrutiny whether he will attend Trinity for Easter. Good going Barrack.

C'mon Obamaites -- why don't you take a good look at your candidate. He is a hypocrite and lies about much more serious matters.

We want a President who will lead and that person is Hillary Clinton, not the neophyte orator, Obama.

alee-- there is video evidence demonstrating that the landing Hillary described as "dangerous" and "under sniper fire", was nothing of the sort. Hillary lied. Plain and simple. And no amount of attacks on anyone else's records can change that.

Hillary, talking about her Bosnian adventure on St Pat's Day 2008 with the actual video footage of Hillary with Chelsea in Bosnia as the visual backdrop would make a nice Obama political ad to play on the TV throughout Pennsylvania. Let the American people see that The Clinton's will say and do anything to win. They have little integrity yet so many Democrats support this lethal political family. They have surrogates throughout the country like Togo West who'll back up their lies all in hopes of an appointment if Hillary wins.

LIAR, LIAR, PANTSUIT ON FIRE! What the Salvatrix of Sarajevo thought was the sound of sniping was photo-op flashbulbs popping and local yokels shooting themselves to death upon being aghast at seeing Chelsea.

If it isn't clear by now, Hillary will do anything to become President, including lying and endorsing McCain. Why she would think the American people want to hear more lies is beyond me. Her methods are an insult to the adults paying attention to what she is doing.

There are 60 seconds in a minute, and 60 minutes in an hour, making a total of 3600 minutes per hour. Assuming she is awake 16 hours per day, and speaking for half of this time, that makes a total of 3600 x 8 hours = 28,800 seconds of speech, maximum. As she clearly states "millions" in the plural, we must assume a minimum of 2 million words per day, and 2 million divided by 28,800 gives a total of 69 words per second.

Assuming that what she said is accurate (that she was not just explaining one exaggeration by way of another), she truly does have pretty amazing powers of communication. In fact, 69 words per second would probably put her into Guiness's book of records. Which would show she is truly modest, since she always reminds us that Obama is a much better speaker than she is!

Hillary seems unconcerned about Chelsea getting off that plane. If it were me, and I had been told that there might be snipers in the area, my kid would have been at my side with my arm around her. Hillary has never been accused of being a bad mother so I can only conclude; she was not worried about snipers!
And her answer to the Philadelphia Daily News: "You know, I think that, a minor blip, you know, if I said something that, you know, I say a lot of things -- millions of words a day -- so if I misspoke, that was just a mistatement." is son incoherent; it sounds like a Bushism.

Hillary seems unconcerned about Chelsea getting off that plane. If it were me, and I had been told that there might be snipers in the area, my kid would have been at my side with my arm around her. Hillary has never been accused of being a bad mother so I can only conclude; she was not worried about snipers!
And her answer to the Philadelphia Daily News: "You know, I think that, a minor blip, you know, if I said something that, you know, I say a lot of things -- millions of words a day -- so if I misspoke, that was just a mistatement." is so incoherent; it sounds like a Bushism.

TODAY'S NEW YORK TIMES REPORTING THAT HILLARY WINNING NOMINATION ABOUT AS LIKELY AS HER BEING SHOT AT BY SNIPERS IN BOSNIA ...

(DID SHE REALLY SAY THAT?)

The electorate that matters most now are not the voters waiting to go to the polls in the 10 nominating contests that remain between now and June. Instead, it is the superdelegates, -- the elected officials and party leaders who have automatic status as uncommitted delegates and whose votes are needed to put either Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton over the top. There are about 800 of them, and they are going be weighing two main arguments: Mr. Obama's contention that the Democratic rank-and-file has expressed its will and superdelegates shouldn't overturn it, and Mrs. Clinton's brief that she offers the party the best chance to defeat Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican, this fall.

Mr. Obama's side of the argument has become almost unassailable, while Mrs. Clinton's is, at the least, open to debate. Mrs. Clinton's best hope now is that Mr. Obama, as a candidate, suffers a political collapse akin to what has happened to the subprime mortgage market, a view shared by aides in both campaigns. ...

TODAY'S NEW YORK TIMES REPORTING THAT HILLARY WINNING NOMINATION ABOUT AS LIKELY AS HER BEING SHOT AT BY SNIPERS IN BOSNIA ...

(DID SHE REALLY SAY THAT?)

The electorate that matters most now are not the voters waiting to go to the polls in the 10 nominating contests that remain between now and June. Instead, it is the superdelegates, -- the elected officials and party leaders who have automatic status as uncommitted delegates and whose votes are needed to put either Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton over the top. There are about 800 of them, and they are going be weighing two main arguments: Mr. Obama's contention that the Democratic rank-and-file has expressed its will and superdelegates shouldn't overturn it, and Mrs. Clinton's brief that she offers the party the best chance to defeat Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican, this fall.

Mr. Obama's side of the argument has become almost unassailable, while Mrs. Clinton's is, at the least, open to debate. Mrs. Clinton's best hope now is that Mr. Obama, as a candidate, suffers a political collapse akin to what has happened to the subprime mortgage market, a view shared by aides in both campaigns. ...

Now that people have trashed Hillary lets get back to Obama's Minsters 'sermon's if Obama was not in church all the times then if his wife was there remember her the one who is proud of America for the first time in her adult life she should have heard the minster say these things why did she not let her hubby know that this kind of hatred was being preached, or is it because he only joined this church to get away from being called a muslim

What strikes me as odd in the "I didn't say that in my book or other times"-argument with which Ms Clinton tries to marginalize it as a one-incident off-hand slip of the tongue comment is that if you recount a certain story so many times, how can you all of a sudden misspeak on such important details? It is like occasionally forgetting who your high school date was once every ten times you tell the story.

Hillary would have had a better case had she said she was thinking of another trip, but then again there were probably not that many sniper-prone areas where she landed with her daughter after all.

Are you SURE that the First Lady was never told to "run to the cars"?
Posted by: JakeD | March 24, 2008 04:38 PM
__________________________________
Do you have a link to the first speech she gave that says that they DID "run to the cars with their heads down"? I've only heard it as "we were told". Thanks in advance.
Posted by: JakeD | March 24, 2008 06:01 PM
__________________________________
Jeanie and thecrisis:
No one has PROVEN (JK5432's phrasing, not mine) that she "lied".
Posted by: JakeD | March 24, 2008 06:23 PM
__________________________________
liar, liar and Steve:
No one is saying that it's O.K. to lie -- what I am saying, at least, is that no one has PROVEN (JK5432's phrasing, not mine) that she "lied". Do you KNOW that she was not told to "run for the cars" on that trip?
Posted by: JakeD | March 24, 2008 06:43 PM
__________________________________
See http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/25/campaign.wrap/index.html. "Sen. Hillary Clinton said she "misspoke" last week when she gave a dramatic description of her arrival in Bosnia 12 years ago, recounting a landing under sniper fire.

Clinton was responding to a question Monday from the Philadelphia Daily News' editorial board about video footage of the event that contradicted her assertion that her group "ran with our heads down" from the plane to avoid sniper fire at the Tuzla Air Base."
Note that she STATED that they "ran with (their) heads down." It wasn't whether or not she was told X, it was that she said she did X.

Point being, you disputed several posters without having the facts straight yourself, which you seemed to acknowledge in your first post. ("I've only heard it as "we were told".")

Hillary Clinton must think that we are all hopelessly stupid. Were we expected to believe that the Secret Service and the military officers on board (a) would have allowed a plane carrying the First Lady and the "First Daughter" to land somewhere where they knew they'd come under sniper fire and then, to compound one incredible situation with another, (b) would have actually disembarked the plane, telling the president's family to duck their heads and run for cover?

What a liar. And she would have told this story all campaign long if the media hadn't called her on it.

The beginning of the interview refers to Hillary's ackowledgement that she mispoke when she told that she was under sniper fires when she arrived in Bosnia.

However, the best part of the interview comes at the two/third of it when Jonathan Alter mentions many cases of substantive exagerations by Hillary: Northen-Ireland peace process, CHIPS, family-medical leave act,...

Here's the full quote: "She said when she arrived in Bosnia on March 25, 1996, "I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.""

In fact, videos show them leisurely leaving the plane, meeting a greeting party. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXbtwq8atkw. Notice the inconsistency between statements on the tape: first she says "we ran to our vehicles with our heads down", and later she says "and we basically were told to run to our cars".

Her assertion that if it was too dangerous for the President, send the First Lady, was also false, as Bill Clinton visited Bosnia before she did.

Posted by: jollygood: McCain also mislead the public, saying his visit to a Bagdad market was safe, when he was protected troops and helicopters as he spent 10 minutes buying a falafal. It seems to me there is just one candidate left who beleives truth is the best policy.

This is laughable. McCain was lying because he wasn't shot while eating a falafel in Baghdad? Let me guess, you think Obama is honest? The guy that sat in a pew for 20 years listening to a racist preacher and claiming he didn't know he was listening to hate spewing from the pulpit? Go back and listen to his interviews before his so called "teaching speech on race relations". You will catch him in bold faced lies when comparing what he said in that speech just like Hillary has been caught now. Both, Obama and Hillary, are not fit to be Commander in Chief of this country. They are dishonest and exaggerate everything they try to claim as experience or justification for us giving them our votes. McCain looks like he is already President compared to these two Democrat yahoos.

Incredible that so much time and ink would be spent on an this story. So if she was shot at, she would be more qualified to be president, is that it?
Or are we testing memory from 12 years ago?
The full story, and its been posted here is that she went out to forward bases after landing at Tuzla, if she were in greater danger there, would Sinbad tell us, oh, he didn't go out to the forward bases where the CBS Reporter said, at the time, that no First Lady had ever before ventured.

The misstatement was minor, so all of you Obamanaiacs, get over your obscessing with this.

Memory from 12 years ago is one thing and whether Clinton recalled the sequents of events correctly, she may have meant that there was sniper fire nearby, she had to be cautious and aware that there may be some sniper fire, it was a combat zone. If she misspoke, then the truth was shaded because the thrust of the statement was correct. She went into a combat zone to visit the troops, and as the CBS Report states, to keep her word, given the prior December to do so.

So to keep her word, she went into a combat zone which is something no other First Lady has done.

Now Obama and his truthtelling ability. Right after the Rev. Wright issue exploded, a columnist in the New York Times, William Krystol inaccurately reported the Obama was in the church during the sermons at a time after Obama had said that he was never present in the church when Wright was making these race baiting anti-American statements.

Krystol was widely condemned for his article and he has since retracted it. Obamaniacs protested that the comment was seriously damaging because if Obama was indeed in the church, it would end his candidacy. Truth telling was that important on this issue.

Then, in the race speech, Obama fessed up, he said he was in the church. Now that's not just missing the facts by a little bit.

The equivalent with regard to Clinton's remarks would have been if she said she had gone to Tuzla when actually she never left the White House.

Obama's prevarication is that big a lie to say that he was not present, when actually he was. And this was not a recent recolletion. One year ago he was told to distance himself from his preacher because the preacher was controversial. Obama knew that one year ago before his immediate first statement after the exposure that he was not present in the church.

So when caught with daming facts, Obama's first impulse is to --- What Children, what does Obama do when he is caught with daming facts??

He lies. Yes he lies openly, not missing a recollection, but knowing the true facts, he lies and has enough hubris and arrogance to think he can get away with his lie.

Well with the coddling press he can and he has apparently as this Clinton story is getting far more play than Obama's daming confession.

But that's fine, out here in the real world, away from the small tightly wired world of the national press, we all hear what is going on and we can sort out what is real and what is not.

When we the people speak in elections, the talking heads get that look on their faces like fish with the hook caught in their throat. Their ginned up reality has to come face to face with the reality of the voters. In this country, the people are still the ultimate jury, not the press, not the talking heads, but the people.

When we speak, then the case is closed. Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Indiana, West Virginia and Kentucky.

Let the people speak. Let them give their verdict on these candidates and let us trust the people to deliver up the right candidate as our Democratic nominee, whomever that candidate might be.

Posted by: jollygood: McCain also mislead the public, saying his visit to a Bagdad market was safe, when he was protected troops and helicopters as he spent 10 minutes buying a falafal. It seems to me there is just one candidate left who beleives truth is the best policy.

This is laughable. McCain was lying because he wasn't shot while eating a falafel in Baghdad? Let me guess, you think Obama is honest? The guy that sat in a pew for 20 years listening to a racist preacher and claiming he didn't know he was listening to hate spewing from the pulpit? Go back and listen to his interviews before his so called "teaching speech on race relations". You will catch him in bold faced lies when comparing what he said in that speech just like Hillary has been caught now. Both, Obama and Hillary, are not fit to be Commander in Chief of this country. They are dishonest and exaggerate everything they try to claim as experience or justification for us giving them our votes. McCain looks like he is already President compared to these two Democrat yahoos.

Nobody seems to have notice that Clinton had a plan for working on getting out of Iraq on her web site several months ago wqhich included consulting with the joint chiefs on how best to bring the military home. At the time, the Obama web site had no plan. It just advocated setting a deadline. About a month ago the Obama web site suddenly included Clinton's plan.

This is also trivial, but it shows a lack of honesty and planning on the part of Obama's campaign. It is not testing someone's memory of what happened 10 years ago. If you ever have to give testamony in court about something you did 10 years ago, you will see that you do not remember much very accurately.

I used to argue with my fiancee about Hillary, I am for Barack, and we would go at it.

She was a die-hard supporter of Hillary, like most of the Hispanic females I know. "experience, experience" she would say. I would try to show her the holes in the claims, it was pointless...

Until last night, while we were watching Countdown and this story broke. My fiancee was visibly angry at the fact that Hillary had made up a war story at a time when our people are truly being sniped at and worse.

She was so disgusted that she swore not to support Hillary any longer, and said she felt too embarrassed to wear the Hillary '08 shirts I had given her. Today she went to work (public school teacher) and let her class know how she had changed her decision and is now backing Obama.

This is serious. HRC has been emphasizing "experience" to the point that she sounds like a Head On commercial. Her tactic has been to try to hypnotize or brain wash the public into believing she has presidential experience. Her gross exaggerations about her peace making in Northern Ireland has never been questioned by the press. Yet, HRC had the hubris to claim that her meetings with Catholic and Prostestant women was ground breaking. When in fact, women of both faiths who had suffered the tragedy of having their little children killed during the fighting had started a peace movement years before HRC ever arrived. In fact that she would take credit from the mothers who have sort peace over the dead bodies of their babies, is rather disgusting in itself. There is something seriously wrong with HRC's character. She has shown a lack of humility which is creepy. Saying she ducked bullets sounds like something a little kid would do in order to bring attention to themselves. For all of you who have been mesmerized by HRC's so called "experience" commercials: Wake up! Wake up! Wake up!

"Sometimes it's the trivial errors . . . " Trivial error? This was blatant dishonesty. She didn't slip over whether she was wearing a yellow suit or a brown one. She wanted us to believe that this happened. It didn't, and she knew it didn't. That doesn't seem trivial to me.

Now that people have trashed Hillary lets get back to Obama's Minsters 'sermon's if Obama was not in church all the times then if his wife was there remember her the one who is proud of America for the first time in her adult life she should have heard the minster say these things why did she not let her hubby know that this kind of hatred was being preached, or is it because he only joined this church to get away from being called a muslim

Posted by: maggie | March 25, 2008 12:36 PM

*************************
yes, let's go back you, svredundant (what time is it in California, Mr. CEO?), and the other "News of the World" readers and your grand conspiracy theories. No need for common sense to intrude...

Now that people have trashed Hillary lets get back to Obama's Minsters 'sermon's if Obama was not in church all the times then if his wife was there remember her the one who is proud of America for the first time in her adult life she should have heard the minster say these things why did she not let her hubby know that this kind of hatred was being preached, or is it because he only joined this church to get away from being called a muslim

Posted by: maggie | March 25, 2008 12:36 PM

*************************
yes, let's go back you, svredundant (what time is it in California, Mr. CEO?), and the other "News of the World" readers and your grand conspiracy theories. No need for common sense to intrude...

Clearly, Mr Dobbs has become invested in his claim Sen Clinton's story is a material falsehood. This is unprofessional. He ought to take a deep breath and consider what his appropriate role in this matter should be. I can assure you, advocate for political repercussions is not it.

On Sunday, March 31, 1996, according to Ms. Lewinsky, she and the President resumed their sexual contact.(264) Ms. Lewinsky was at the White House from 10:21 a.m. to 4:27 p.m. on that day.(265) The President was in the Oval Office from 3:00 to 5:46 p.m.(266) His only call while in the Oval Office was from 3:06 to 3:07 p.m.(267) Mrs. Clinton was in Ireland.(268)

According to Ms. Lewinsky, the President telephoned her at her desk and suggested that she come to the Oval Office on the pretext of delivering papers to him.(269) She went to the Oval Office and was admitted by a plainclothes Secret Service agent.(270) In her folder was a gift for the President, a Hugo Boss necktie.(271)

In the hallway by the study, the President and Ms. Lewinsky kissed. On this occasion, according to Ms. Lewinsky, "he focused on me pretty exclusively," kissing her bare breasts and fondling her genitals.(272) At one point, the President inserted a cigar into Ms. Lewinsky's vagina, then put the cigar in his mouth and said: "It tastes good."(273) After they were finished, Ms. Lewinsky left the Oval Office and walked through the Rose Garden.(274)

HAHHAHAHHAHA She was in Bosnia during the cigar incedent. HAHAHAHHAHAHA Too good to be true!!! The Clintons are such scum!

As I see it, there are 4 plausible explanations for this "misstatement". 1. She ducked sniper fire at some other major foreign policy junket she was asked to attend (with her teen daughter) that was simply too hazardous for the president to attend - in which case the press can search their archives for actual evidence. 2. She needs to exaggerate her thin resume on actual foreign policy work - to match her hyped claims on the campaign stump. 3. She is one of the many sad people who view simple fact as an obstacle to be circumvented at every turn - out of sheer habit. 4. She assumes the electorate that is stupid enough to vote for "fairy tale" candidate Obama can be simarlarly bamboozled by her when she lies - and that lies repeated incessantly somehow evolve into accepted fact. Whichever fits, what's Togo West's lame excuse for signing on to carry her poop-filled baggage.

Mainstream Democrats should have caught on to Obama the moment his supporters gleefully started repeatng every right-wing anti-clinton screed known to mankind.

Obama's groupies aren't Democrats, they're members of the "cult of Obama"

They don't care who they destroy, or how much damage they do to the Democratic Party, just as long as they win.

They'll throw anyone and everyone "under teh bus" if it gets them what they want.

People are finding out who Barry Obama really is and they don't like what they see.

He's a slick, slimy, Chicago politician.

The only color he cares about is the green of money.

Obama constantly took credit for bills he wasn't even involved with, starting back in Chicago, and he showed he has absolutely no shame by grabbing the microphone and talking about getting up for 7am meetings about bills that he never even went to.

Obama lied about Rezko on national TV during the debates.

Obama lied about Rev. Wright.

Barry Obama has pulled the biggest "con-job" in history by using his "new kind of politics" pitch to stop the press from looking into his past.

Republicans won't be the least bit shy about doing what the press has failed to do so far.

If we Democrats nominate him, we're going to lose by a landslide.

He's a slick politician.

Just like Bush.

He got elected in Chicago by forcing everyone else off the ballot.

Now he's trying to prevent FL and MI voters from having their votes count.

"Misspoke", "Misstatement", "a minor blip"??? I don't think so. This is clearly a character issue and Senator Clinton has shown that she's capable of telling these bald faced lies over and over again if it means getting the nomination. How many times in a person's life is there a situation where there are bullets flying around? If that really happened, most human beings would remember every second. She just conjured the situation out of thin air and got pretty much a free pass from the media. I dare any media person out there to ask Senator Clinton this question: "Senator Clinton, have you ever been in a position in your life where there were bullets flying around with a danger of you being hit?" I don't want her to be my Commander in Chief.

I would have been the first woman to scale Mt. Everest, but our climbing team took on sniper fire from Bosnia insurgents. Still, isn't it cool my mommy named me after a famous mountain climber, just like me?

I'm reading here that Clinton failed to accurately relate her visit to Tuzla 12 years ago and therefore the case is made that she should immediately drop out of the nomination race.

By this standard, Obama's failure to remember that he was in his pastor's church when his pastor was goddamming America should result in his abandonment of his bid for the nomination as well.

Then there are the posters who are writing that the people have spoken, Obama has won, its impossible for Hillary to win and case closed.

Really?
Tell the people of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Indiana, North Carolina Kentucky and others that they have already spoken. They have not.

And as for the math that Obama's people seem to arrogantly claim that Clinton has no talent for, it takes 2024 delegates to win the nomination. At the end of the primary and caucus season, neither candidate will have 2024. That is a mathematical fact. It will be up to the convention to actually nominate rather than coronate the nominee. Imagine, a nominating convention that actually nominates.

And ever since the 1980 convention (Kennedy v. Carter) Pledged delegates are no longer bound to the candidate to whom they were pledged to support. Things change, as the Party ruled in 1980 so that those delegates elected and pledged to a candidate in say January may have a different view by the time August comes around.

In this race, how many delegates were elected pledged to Obama who now wish that they could get out of having to cast their vote, in convention, for a guy who would condone hate speak about his fellow Americans who were not black and who would goddamn America. And I have seen the entire sermon, it has been posted, not just the daming part, but the whole thing and regardless of the context you put that talk into, goddaming America is still goddaming America and there is no excuse, no justification that can be made for that and no excuse for Obama to have tolerated such talk as an elected official of the State of Illinois, as a Christian or as a person.

So no the race is not over, not by a long shot. If the party is going with Obama, it will not be by default, but by a reasoned choice and decision made by the delegates. I know the Party does not like having to make a choice and they are pressuring Clinton to get out, not because she can't win, but because they don't want to be put into the position of having to choose, that is, they want to duck and shirk their duty.

Well, being a Super Delegate means that there is an honor attached, but also a duty and a responsibility to make decisions and this is a big one. Do not blame Clinton for making you do your duty and do your job.

I have read that Super delegates are fearful of offending a large and loyal constitutency group, African Americans. Sure it is a concern. But of equal concern is the offending of an even larger and more pivitol constituency, female voters. What about that??

Rather than worry about offending this constituency or the other, because whatever the supers do, someone will be offended, why not just nominate the candidate that most represents the core Democratic Party and has the best chance for success in the Fall, not just for the Presidency, but the candidate most likely to help out the Democratic ticket from the White House, to the State House to the Courthouse. Decide on that parameter and then let the chips fall where they may.

IN HONOR OF THE POOR WHO FROZE TO DEATH IN OBAMA'S SLUMS:
OBAMA'S SLUMS by "W.P. Svreader"
Based on Chicago by Graham Nash

Obama's voters froze to death,
And they found us in his slums,
Won't the press come to Chicago
Just to see,
In a land that's known as freedom,
How can such a thing be fair?
Won't the press come to Chicago
So our souls can finally rest?

You say change the World.
Rearrange the World.
We died.
You just give us fancy words.

Politicians act like clowns,
Give you nothing but hot air
Barry used us in Chicago.
People died.
Don't ask Obama to help you
Cause he'll turn the other ear.
Won't the press come to Chicago
People died.

He says change the World.
Rearrange / rearrange the World.
We're dying / is there no justice?
We're dying / You don't deserve your freedom!.
We're dying / We had a right to Llive!
You say -- Rules and regulations who needs them?
Open up the door.

Our souls must be set free,
And we hope the day comes soon.
Won't the press come to Chicago?
and show the world your real face.

From the bottom of the ocean
To the mountains of the Moon.
Barry come back to Chicago
You're a traitor to your race!

You say change / yes we can change the World.
Rearrange / rearrange the World.

We're dying / and we demand our justice
We're dying / You don't deserve your freedom.
We're dying / We had a right to Live!
You say -- Rules and regulations, who needs them?
Open up the door.

Quoting from the Ken Starr report is about the very limit. I am convinced that these Obama people are not Democrats at all, but then, neither are they Republicans. They are cultists who would draw from any source available, Ken Starr, you name it, to denigrate Clinton as she is seen as standing in the way of the Prophet Obama.

And Obama claims to be the harbinger of the new politics?? This is old time Republican slash and dash, drive by smear politics. When your popularity with the voters has topped out and its still not enough to put you over the top, then start with cutting on your opponent. If you can't get over your opponent, start tearing down your opponent.

That is Bush-Rove Politics at its best and the Obama Cult has adopted it as its campaign strategy for the balance of this campaign season. Just read what they have posted here. This is not a friendly intra-family dispute among Democrats. This has become personal and ugly to the point that it cannot be put back together for the Fall Campaign.

Just as the Republican Party has been infested with the Bush-strain of virus that has distorted and contorted the values and principles of the Republican Party into something that is unrecognizable to Republicans, the Obama virus has struck the Democratic Party now.

With these threats, made by no less than Doug Wilder, former governor of Virginia and an Obama partisan, that if Obama is not nominated, there will be riots in the streets, now we have threats of violence if the Democratic Party doesn't do the "right thing".

As someone steeped in Middle Eastern politics, this is the same tactic as is used by Hezbollah or Hamas or some other cult like political party. We win or we destroy, is that it Governor Wilder. If we can't convince you of the justness and righteousness of our cause, then we will intimidate you into acceptance with such threats.

If our politics has reached this point, then under George Bush America, indeed, has been reduced to some Bush-league third world country.

I only hope that the desperation in the Obama camp is not so high that his cultists will take to the streets in order for their man to prevail. I also hope that no one will be intimidated into making a choice that they really do not want to make. Among a free people, free and fair elections. What is free about an election conducted under threats.

Politics of hope? New Politics? No. I would think that Obama's brother in Kenya is running a better campaign there than Barak is running here. His campaign slogan:
Change. Its a family mantra.

Who Is Nadhmi Auchi and What's His Tie to Obama?
By Jack Kelly
You probably would have heard of Nadhmi Auchi by now if Sen. Barack Obama were a Republican.
A British citizen of Iraqi descent, Mr. Auchi, 70, is a billionaire, the 279th richest man in the world, according to a Forbes magazine survey last year.
A great deal of Mr. Auchi's money was made doing business with the regime of Saddam Hussein, much of it under the table. In 1987, Mr. Auchi helped French and Italian firms win a huge oil pipeline contract in Iraq, chiefly by paying off Iraqi officials, according to testimony given by an Italian banker to prosecutors in Milan. In 2003, he was convicted for his role in what was then the largest scandal in French history, involving payoffs from executives of the oil company now known as Total to political figures in Spain, Germany and Africa.
"He has been able to collect British politicians the way other people collect stamps," wrote Nick Cohen in a 2003 profile of Mr. Auchi in the left wing British newspaper the Observer.
Mr. Auchi was a leading supplier of arms to Saddam's regime. A former Belgian ambassador to Luxembourg charged that a bank in Luxembourg owned principally by Mr. Auchi laundered funds -- including oil for food money -- for Saddam and other Islamic dictators.
"The name Nadhmi Auchi was just another name for Saddam's intelligence service, or so we thought," said Nibras Kazimi, a former Iraqi dissident who is now a visiting scholar at the Hudson Institute in Washington D.C.
Mr. Auchi is a business partner of Syrian-born businessman Antoin "Tony" Rezko, who has supported Mr. Obama financially since his first run for the Illinois state senate in 1996.
Mr. Rezko currently is in jail awaiting trial on charges he extorted money from firms seeking to do business with the state of Illinois. (Mr. Rezko was also a fund raiser for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.) Mr. Rezko's bail was revoked Jan. 28 when the trial judge learned that he, friends and relatives had been wired $3.5 million from firms in Lebanon controlled by Mr. Auchi. The judge feared Mr. Rezko was about to flee the country.
Federal prosecutors allege a $10,000 contribution made by Mr. Rezko to Sen. Obama came from a $250,000 kickback, but there is no evidence Sen. Obama was aware of the source of the funds. Nor is there evidence Sen. Obama did any favors for Mr. Rezko that skirted the law.
The most eyebrow raising connection between Mr. Rezko and Sen. Obama is the assistance Mr. Rezko provided in the purchase of the mansion on Chicago's South Side that Sen. Obama bought in 2005. The Obamas bought the house for $1.65 million -- $300,000 below the asking price -- perhaps because Mr. Rezko's wife purchased from the owner an adjacent garden plot for $625,000. (The sellers deny they offered the Obamas a discount.) The Times of London wondered where Mrs. Rezko got the money to buy the garden plot. At the time, she had a salary of $37,000 and assets of only $35,000, the Times learned. Her husband told a court that at the time he had "no income, negative cash flow, no liquid assets," the Times said.
The Times learned Mr. Rezko received an earlier $3.5 million loan from Mr. Auchi on May 23, 2005, through the Panamanian company Fintrade Services SA.
Mr. Rezko has described Mr. Auchi as a "close friend." Mr. Auchi says they have only a business relationship. They've been partners in a chain of pizza restaurants in Wisconsin and in a major real estate development in Riverside Park in Chicago.
The connection between Mr. Auchi and Sen. Obama is tenuous. But given Mr. Auchi's shady past, his history of bribing politicians, it's not unreasonable to ask if Mr. Auchi, through Mr. Rezko, was trying to buy influence with a rising political star. And it's curious that outside of the Chicago Sun Times and the Chicago Tribune, both of which have written extensively on the Rezko-Obama relationship, only a British newspaper is asking.
The New York Times and the Washington Post have made much of Sen. John McCain's friendship with an attractive female lobbyist, though not even the Times' anonymous sources allege Sen. McCain had an affair with Vicki Iseman, or acted improperly on behalf of her clients. But they and the rest of the national news media have been remarkably incurious about Sen. Obama's relationship with Mr. Rezko, and his with Mr. Auchi.
Mr. Rezko's trial begins Monday, March 3. It will be interesting to see if the national news media will cover it.
Copyright 2008, Journal Press Syndicate
Page Printed from: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/who_is_nadhmi_auchi_and_whats.html at March 16, 2008 - 07:51:36 PM CST _uacct = "UA-31527-1"; urchinTracker();

CHICAGO, IL--Senator Barack Obama today posted his tax returns from 2000-2006 on his campaign website, demonstrating his continued commitment to transparency in government and changing business as usual in Washington. The returns are complete, including all schedules, and are now available to anyone to view. The Obama campaign urged Senator Clinton to join Senator Obama in making her returns public.

Full disclosure on Senator Clinton's part is especially important because she recently loaned $5 million to her campaign, shortly after revelations surfaced that her husband was to receive a $20 million payout from Yucaipa, a supermarket holding company that invests in tax shelters in the Cayman Islands.

Senator Clinton has agreed to release her returns, but will only offer a target date at least three days before the Pennsylvania primary, and has not specified the level of detail.

"Senator Clinton recently claimed that she's 'the most transparent figure in public life,' yet she's dragging her feet in releasing something as basic as her annual tax returns," said Obama Communications Director Robert Gibbs. "Senator Clinton can't claim to be vetted until she allows the public the opportunity to see her finances--particularly with respect to any investment in tax shelters."

The Clinton campaign's vague commitment to release the returns and the Clintons' known involvement with such investments as Yucaipa raise a number of questions.

1. Yucaipa Has A Financial Stake In Three Investment Entities Registered In The Cayman Islands. "Securities and Exchange Commission documents and financial- disclosure forms filed by Hillary Clinton show that Bill Clinton, 61, has a financial stake in three investment entities registered in the Cayman Islands by Burkle's Yucaipa Cos. LLC. In 2004, Hillary Clinton, a New York senator, said she wanted to close the ``loopholes'' for ``people who create a mailbox, or a drop, or send one person to sit on the beach in some island paradise and claim that it is their offshore headquarters.'' [Bloomberg, 12/17/07]

Ã Question: If elected President, would Sen. Clinton propose or support legislation to block or curb any of Yucaipa's current business or tax strategies?

2. Clinton Spokesman Claimed That Yucaipa Is Registered In Cayman So That Bill Clinton Can Pay US Taxes. "Jay Carson, a Clinton spokesman, said that while the former president hasn't ``severed ties'' with Yucaipa, he ``is taking steps to ensure'' that ``there will be an appropriate transition for those relationships'' if his wife receives the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. Carson, in an e-mail, said the funds are designed for foreign investors. ``All three of these entities (which are related) are organized in the Cayman Islands so that each investor or partner pays the taxes they would owe in their home country,'' he said. ``For U.S. citizens like Bill Clinton, that means he pays U.S. taxes on his income from this fund, which he does.'' [Bloomberg, 12/17/07]

Ã Question: Did Bill Clinton participate in the decision for Yucaipa to register any of these funds in the Cayman Islands? If so, did he argue for or against?

3. Clinton Spokesperson Will Not Answer Questions On Whether Bill Clinton Receives Equity Instead Of Cash, Allowing Him To Pay The Lower 15 % Capital Gains Tax Rate Instead Of Higher Income Tax Rate. "Carson said Bill Clinton's payments from Yucaipa aren't deferred and the former president pays tax on that income in the year in which it is earned. Steven Howard, a partner at Thacher Proffitt & Wood LLP in New York who advises investment firms, said private-equity firms such as Yucaipa often compensate advisers with a stake in the company rather than salary. ``In Clinton's case, he may be allocated equity instead of significant cash for services rendered,'' Howard said. Carson didn't respond to questions about whether Bill Clinton receives this form of compensation. Howard said equity allocations are taxed at the 15 percent capital-gains rate instead of as ordinary income, which is taxed at rates as high as 35 percent. He said the same benefit applies to so-called carried interest, a profit-sharing arrangement used by fund managers that Hillary Clinton and other Democrats have criticized and vow to curb." [Bloomberg, 12/17/07]

Ã Question: Is Bill Clinton allocated equity? What is the effective tax rate that Bill Clinton pays on all income or gains from Yucaipa?

4. Clintons Won't Explain Why Yucaipa Was Listed On Disclosure Forms As Based In Los Angeles Rather Than Cayman; Won't Disclose When Sen. Clinton Became Aware Of Husband's Offshore Deals. "Bloomberg's questions to the campaign involved the nature and amounts of his compensation from Yucaipa, why the holdings were listed as Los Angeles-based rather than Cayman Islands entities, and when Hillary Clinton became aware that the funds were offshore. Carson didn't address those questions. Yucaipa spokesman Frank Quintero referred all questions about the former president's role to the Clintons' spokespeople." [Bloomberg, 12/17/07]

Ã Question: Why do the Clintons consider Yucaipa to be a Los Angeles-based company when it is actually based in the Cayman Islands?

Ã Question: Why were the Clintons unable to answer the media's questions in mid-December 2007?

Ironically, Senator Clinton herself made the release of her opponent's tax returns a central issue when she ran for the Senate in 2000. Numerous Democratic presidential candidates in recent years have released their tax returns, including Senator Kerry, Senator Edwards, General Clark, Senator Lieberman, and Congressman Kucinich.

With the next primary only weeks away and sure to see significant spending from the Clinton campaign, now is the time for Senator Clinton to keep faith with the voters, release her tax returns, and allow these questions to be answered in full. In the meantime, you can view Senator Obama's 2000-2006 tax returns HERE.

Clinton has claimed that releasing her tax returns is unnecessary because she has filed the personal financial disclosure forms that all Senators are required by to submit. But there are key facts that the personal financial disclosure form alone does not disclose, including:

Ã˜ The amount the Clintons make as a couple;
Ã˜ Senator and President Clinton's effective tax rate;
Ã˜ What loopholes, if any, they used to reduce it;
Ã˜ The actual amount of President Clinton's income and not just the range;
Ã˜ What stock have they sold, and how much did they made from it;
Ã˜ The amount they made from their stock dividends;
Ã˜ The deductions they took for losses related to stock sales;
Ã˜ The household employment taxes they paid for employees;
Ã˜ The personal exemptions they took; and
Ã˜ The charitable contributions they have made.

1. Why did Obama sit in that church for 20 years listening to hate speech and anti-American laced rantings and do nothing?

Posted by: Beiruti | March 25, 2008 03:00 PM

***********************
interesting question - since you know for a fact that all Reverend Wright did was spew hatred every Sunday of every month of every year of the 20 years that Senator Obama attended the church. Now I know that it might surprise someone of your limited insight, but might I suggest that you look at his sermons beyond the soundbites of the Faux News networ. There is a lot of information out there that gives nuance and substance to this issue. To keep repeating this question is disingenous and simple-minded. It's a question that should lead someone with a functioning mind to gather facts and not fall for the feigned, hypocritical outrage of the right-wing.

Further, do YOU know whether Senator Obama ever approached Rev Wright regarding his statements? Because if you can prove he didn't, Carnak, I want you to open in Vegas - your psychic powers are too good to waste on a board.

People are finding out who Barry Obama really is and they don't like what they see.

He's a slick, slimy, Chicago politician.

The only color he cares about is the green of money.

Obama constantly took credit for bills he wasn't even involved with, starting back in Chicago, and he showed he has absolutely no shame by grabbing the microphone and talking about getting up for 7am meetings about bills that he never even went to.

Obama lied about Rezko on national TV during the debates.

Obama lied about Rev. Wright.

Barry Obama has pulled the biggest "con-job" in history by using his "new kind of politics" pitch to stop the press from looking into his past.

Republicans won't be the least bit shy about doing what the press has failed to do so far.

If we Democrats nominate him, we're going to lose by a landslide.

He's a slick politician.

Just like Bush.

He got elected in Chicago by forcing everyone else off the ballot.

Now he's trying to prevent FL and MI voters from having their votes count.

And speaking of songs written especially for people. Here's one for my psychotic, cold eye-reading, cut-pasting, any rumor will do for me, alleged CEO/humanitarian Senator Obama hater: SVREADERRRRRRRRRRRR

They're Coming to Take Me Away, Ha-haaa!

Remember when you ran away
And I got on my knees
And begged you not to leave
Because I'd go berserk?
Well. . .

You left me anyhow
And then the days got worse and worse
And now you see I've gone
Completely out of my mind
And. . .

They're coming to take me away, HA HA
They're coming to take me away, HO HO HEE HEE HA HA
To the funny farm
Where life is beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see
Those nice, young men
In their clean, white coats
And they're coming to take me away, Ha-haaa!

You thought it was a joke
And so you laughed
You laughed when I had said
That losing you would make me flip my lid
Right. . .

You know you laughed, I heard you laugh
You laughed, you laughed and laughed
And then you left
But now you know I'm utterly mad!
And. . .

They're coming to take me away, HA HA
They're coming to take me away, HO HO HEE HEE HA HA
To the happy home
With trees and flowers and chirping birds
And basket weavers who sit and smile
And twiddle their thumbs and toes
And they're coming to take me away, Ha-haaa!

I cooked your food
I cleaned your house
And this is how you pay me back
For all my kind, unselfish loving deeds?!!
Hah. . .

Well you just wait
They'll find you yet
And when they do they'll
Put you in the ASPCA, you mangy mutt!
And. . .

They're coming to take me away, HA HA
They're coming to take me away, HO HO HEE HEE HA HA
To the funny farm
Where life is beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see
Those nice, young men
In their clean, white coats
And they're coming to take me away, Ha-haaa!

To the happy home
With trees and flowers and chirping birds
And basket weavers who sit and smile
And twiddle their thumbs and toes
And they're coming to take me away, Ha-haaa!

To the funny farm
Where life is beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see
Those nice, young men
In their clean, white coats
And they're coming to take me away, Ha-haaa!

First, Is anyone at the WaPost moderating this thread? I've never seen so many trolls in one place. Really, I thought the WaPo demographic was a bit more sophisticated than the ranters who regularly post to, and poison, this part of the "paper". There are folks posting here solely to start fights and pollute the atmosphere, and they are doing a heck-of-a-job as far as I can tell. Really, get over the anger and leave a little oxygen for those folks on either side of the divide who are trying to make respectful, well-considered points.

Whew, well, with that out of the way, regarding the ACTUAL subject of this thread. Assuming HRC somehow wins the nomination, I think what you saw on CBS News last night (and on YouTube) is the commercial that will be used to Swiftboat her into oblivion:

"Hello friends, John McCain here. I spent years in a Vietcong prison camp. HRC says she's dodged sniper fire and thus deserves to be President"

Cue CBS New footage- little girl hands Hillary and Celsea some flowers on the tarmac while Sinbad and Sheryl Crow yuck it up...

Posted by: svreader | March 25, 2008 03:37 PM
*********************
See, svredrum, that is first sign of a deep set mental problem - irrational transference. You are on this board like lint on a wool suit, with your repetitious, zombie-like, double spaced rantings. And you throw in things about Obama's eyes. Not even Hillary Clinton supporters are saying the crazy things you say.

Aside from the obvious fubar-quotient of this most current example of Clinton's tenuous (to put it politely) relationship to the truth, the really important question is:

If she's so gosh-darn "experienced," then why did she have to make this up? Isn't there ANYTHING she can point to in foreign experience that is REAL? Answer: Apparently not.

A slightly less important though equally interesting fact this story highlights for intelligent readers is the complete and utter LACK of understanding on Hillary Clinton's part of the difference between now and the 1990's about how information is obtained and distributed in the 21st century.

The old ethical injunction used to be, "Don't do anything you wouldn't want to see on the front page of the newspaper tomorrow." Today's fact of life is that you WILL see it (especially if there's PICTURES)!

And Hillary Clinton is so "yesterday" that she still thinks that telling the truth is an "option." Sad.

Neither Obama nor his supporters care one bit about the poor people who gave Obama his start in Chicago, and froze to death in his slums because he didn't care enough about them to do his job looking out for them.

The fact Obama supporters still push him, knowing this, shows they're as cold-blooded as he is.

All the want to do is win.

It doesn't matter how, or who suffers,the or who they destroy in the process.

People are finding out who Hillary really is and they don't like what they see.

She's a slick, slimy, New York/Arkansas politician.

The only color she cares about is the green of money.

Hillary constantly took credit for husband Bill's victories even when she wasn't even involved with them, starting back in Arkansas, and she showed she has absolutely no shame by trying to grab the headlines and talking about getting peace for Northern Ireland when she went there as a tourist.

Hillary lied about NAFTA on national TV during the debates.

Hillary lied about Bosnia.

Hillary Clinton has pulled the biggest "con-job" in history by using her "First Lady" pitch to stop the press from looking into her failed past.

McCain won't be the least bit shy about doing what the press has failed to do.

If we Democrats nominate her, we're going to lose by a landslide.

She's a slick politician.

Just like Bill.

She got elected from New York by forcing everyone else off the ballot.

Now she's trying to prevent Texas caucus voters from having their votes counted.

Just like Bush did with Florida in 2000.

Its not going to work this time.

The American people aren't as dumb as Hillary and Bill think they are.

Mr. LABC,
No, its not so simpleminded that Obama joined and remained a member of that congregation. I have taken the time to further research the church and the minister. I have viewed his entire sermons including the one that ended with the crescendo of his goddaming America.

The episode raises so many questions about the man, Obama, that were not answered by his speech on race in America.

I have just read the cover story piece in Newsweek on Obama. It too is enlightening. You sort of like the guy, really, he is an interesting character.

But even in this friendly piece, which cites heavily to his book, Dreams of My Father, which is supposed to be an autobiography, Obama uses make believe characters to fill in those parts of his life, that I guess he does not want to share. The author of the Newsweek piece calles them "composite characters". But that's okay for Obama to be the author of the story line of his life to make up parts of it so that all parts fit neatly into the whole image of himself that he would like to be true and that he wants us to accept as true.

I suppose for a young man who is Black, but was raised White, he had many questions about his identity, who he was, what he was, was he White or was he Black, or can he be both Black and White. I think he finally landed on that conclusion that he could be culturally White and ethnically Black.

It is good and necessary for adolescents to try and work out who they are and I wish Obama well in his search.

But who is he? Who are we trusting with the Presidency. More than this, what about the people around him. What do we know of the people who would be entrusted with the Obama Administration? He has already said that he does not do much with administration or executing policies once he has come up with them. He entrusts that bit of government to others. So who are these people that we are to turn the policy making appratus of the US Government over to?

I think as voters and as citizens we have the right and the duty to find out and that hold true of the candidate were Black or White, Red or Yellow, I do want to know who I am voting for.

We made the Bush mistake before. I did not vote for Bush, not the first one and surely not the young idiot, not the first time or the second. Bush is a phoney. He is no more a Texan than a man in the moon. He is a Yankee transplant into the South who took on Southern culture because he and his family are political opportunists who saw which way the wind was blowing and so put their sails into the breeze and came south. George to Texas and Jeb to Florida.

Did George know who he was?? He would be the anti-Clinton, the reverse of the wimpish father, Poppy Bush and acting on that idea of who he was, Bush took the country into the worst strategic foreign policy decision that the country has ever known --- The Iraq War.

To avoid this same mistake, I would like to vote for a guy (or lady) who has a good hold on who they are and who can transparantly tell us who they are. Clinton is very private and doesn't say much on that subject.

Obama gives us books with "composite characters".

Faith is a wonderful thing. I choose to believe in God based on faith, which by definition means belief in something that cannot be proven in the natural world.

Voting for President should not be based on faith, or on hope. It should be based on facts, as much and as verifiable as we can get them. Not only facts on where the candidate stands on policy, but facts on who the person is, how the person faced up to crisis in their life, what obstacles presented themselves and how they responded to overcome obstacles.

I agree with a previous poster, that the site here has been overrun by trolls. In the full court press to cut down the other side, both Clinton and Obama seem to have given their order for the day to troll the bloggs and cut on the other candidate.

It is self destructive. I believe that neither of these historic candidates have a chance at becoming elected president simply because of the way that their supporters have conducted themselves. The name calling is bordering on childish and insulting to the voter. Judas and McCarthy, Hussein and Monster. So childish with the stakes as high as they are in this election.

On Sunday, March 31, 1996, according to Ms. Lewinsky, she and the President resumed their sexual contact.(264) Ms. Lewinsky was at the White House from 10:21 a.m. to 4:27 p.m. on that day.(265) The President was in the Oval Office from 3:00 to 5:46 p.m.(266) His only call while in the Oval Office was from 3:06 to 3:07 p.m.(267) Mrs. Clinton was in Ireland.(268)

According to Ms. Lewinsky, the President telephoned her at her desk and suggested that she come to the Oval Office on the pretext of delivering papers to him.(269) She went to the Oval Office and was admitted by a plainclothes Secret Service agent.(270) In her folder was a gift for the President, a Hugo Boss necktie.(271)

In the hallway by the study, the President and Ms. Lewinsky kissed. On this occasion, according to Ms. Lewinsky, "he focused on me pretty exclusively," kissing her bare b.... and fondling her genitals.(272) At one point, the President inserted a cigar into Ms. Lewinsky's v..., then put the cigar in his mouth and said: "It tastes good."(273) After they were finished, Ms. Lewinsky left the Oval Office and walked through the Rose Garden.(274)

Neither Hillary nor her supporters care one bit about the poor people who gave Hillary her start in Arkansas, and met with untimely and strange deaths in the Arkansas countryside because of their perceived connection with Hillary and Bill.

The fact that Hillary supporters still push her, knowing this, shows they're as cold-blooded and divorced from reality as she is.

All thet want to do is win and spend a night in the Lincoln bedroom.

It doesn't matter how loose they are with the facts, or how they ignore the truth, or if they destroy the Democratic Party in the process.

The real winner here is McCain. Although this "gotcha" may hurt Clinton somewhat, and help detract from Obama's "Pastorgate", the fact is that unlike Clinton and Obama, McCain actually did come under hostile fire. So what may seem to be a clever score by the Obama team, might actually come back to bite them in the *ss. All this does is bolster McCain's CAC credentials among white swingvoters, and reminds them that Clinton and Obama have very few.

svreader
Why do you insist on calling Obama's church a cult? As a member of UCC, I find this very offensive and closedminded, especially from someone who supports the Clintons. United church of Christ is a very open Christian denomination, which has always been at the forefront on human rights issues. (Isn't that Christ's way?) I suggest you spend less time posting and more time informing yourself. Hillary's association with the "Family" aka the "Fellowship" is far more secretive and cult-like than UCC. But, we shouldn't judge her choice either. Haven't we had enough from the holier-than-thou conservatives?

I wonder if Hillary and McCain exchanged "war stories" during their travels? I remember McCain's old pal Duke Tully...the Arizona newspaper publisher. He told some real whoppers and McCain ate it all up. Tully even invented a heroic war record for himself. He convinced everyone that he had flown more than 100 missions in Vietnam, and had been awarded a number of military decorations including the Purple Heart and Flying Cross. Turns out it was all fictitious.

After everything came out into the open he resigned as publisher. His own paper printed his verbatim remarks: "It just built and built, and suddenly I was under an avalanche and could not get out of it. As you move up the ladder, it just snowballed and got away from me."

Does that sound like the Clintons?

One of the many things I admire about Barack Obama is when he is confronted by something, he comes right out and addresses it - publicly and PRESIDENTIALLY.

Say, did I ever tell ya'll that I come from a long line of patriot/farmers going back to the Revolutionary War ? Through an advertisement in Reader's Digest I signed up for the Air Force because the card said they would teach me about electronics. About a month after sending off the card, mom had to tell the two recruiters at the front door that I was only ten (10) years old. I guess they forgot about me and/or God had other plans.

My nephew, who has made a career out of the Airforce (he even married a seargent) was one of the first United States forces into places like Bosnia and Kosovo. He is a heavy equipment operator and was charged with clearing the snow off those airfields so that hotshot pilots like McCain could land and take off.

During those days there was a constant fear of sniper fire, a form of terrorism affecting citizens and soldiers alike. I believe there was a movie made about one of those snipers. My nephew had to pull up his rifle once there while operating a dozer.

I suppose one does not really fully appreciate a thought or feeling that someone is hiding in the shadows having the crosshairs of a scope pointed at the back of one's head. It must be a creapy feeling.

I have also known or have been priveledged to meet some other people having "The Right Stuff". They are different, not exactly elitist but always a pain in the butt, perfectionists.

I am beyond words with Hillary Clinton's parody of her husbands ability to distort reality. I watched her speech regarding her trip to Bosnia, and how she recited it from clear memory. No hesitation for words, just factual statements. At least factual according to those who wouldn't know the truth if it hit them in the head.

I think we may have finally figured out Hillary's problem with telling the truth. In a radio interview with a Pittsburg radio station, Politico.com repeats Hillary's justification for her telling the untruth about coming under sniper fire in Bosnia.

According to Hillary, her statement of untruth occurred because: "Occasionally, I am a human being like everybody else."

Now, since most of us are human beings all of the time, and Hillary is only "occasionally" a human being, then what is Hillary implying she is most of the time? Whatever she is, we don't want it.

Senator Hillary Clinton is America's Iron Lady and if you critics had one tenth of her resume behind your name de plume you might be qualified to comment on her statements. However, the time is ripe for a third political party in the United States and the prediction does not include political lunatics such as Nader. America repines for closure of this Presidency due to Bush's hostile environment with policies contradictory to his professed values. His grandiose and arrogance is similar to that of Nader and Obama. The options of John McCain or novice Barak Obama will prove to be the downfall of the Democratic Party. Americans will not elect Obama to be the President of the United States. On the other hand, the Democratic Party will lose their core members due to the horror of watching Pastor Wright, the anti-American sentiments of Mrs. Obama, and the poor judgment of Barak Obama. The inimical environment created by Axelrod and Obama and will not be forgotten, and Obama's assault for the presidency will destroy the Democratic Party.

It must be something wrong with Clinton family. Why do they lie? Perhaps, they are pathological liars or at best a shroud politicians who want to confuses American people with facts. First Bill and now Hillary. Fortunately they were always caught in lie. Monica and now Tuzla (Bosnia) and many other things in between. But here is something else: These days Hillary is making claims that she is ready to be President on day-one because of her experience while her husband was a President. Therefore someone could argue that if Chelsea was running for the office she could be also qualified to be a President on-day one since she was with Mom in Tuzla Bosnia? They are really silly people or they are completely loosing it. Sad....

There is a pattern here. She just can't stop making up these great adventures. Here is another one:.............She claims to have negotiated the opening of the Macedonian border to Kosovo refugees. In fact, the border was opened up the day BEFORE she arrived and she only spent only a short time actually talking to Macedonian offical, not enough to have any impact. See -----http://www.newsweek.com/id/123121/page/2

Wow, people, she only admitted to misspeaking -- I'm sure you will all let me know when she does the infamous Clinton "I am certain my responses to questions about [Bosnia] were false" -- until then, as I asked doug/seattle: You've NEVER innocently misspoken about anything before (I think I asked specifically about any mode of transportation)?

Even David Kendall, the president's personal lawyer during the Impeachment Fiasco, said Clinton's statement to the Independent Counsel (re: Lewinsky above) was not an admission that he lied or obstructed justice. "He has from the beginning, at least from the grand jury, conceded that he tried to conceal the relationship with Ms. Lewinsky," Kendall said. "He tried to conceal that, and we have acknowledged that that was evasive and misleading. But it's not obstruction of justice. It's not intentional falsification."

With her credibility now shot and in tatters it is time for Hilary to do the party a favor and simply step aside. Obama could reward her by making a her press secretary or something along those lines. She obviously has the skills for that.

With her credibility now shot and in tatters it is time for Hilary to do the party a favor and simply step aside. Obama could reward her by making a her press secretary or something along those lines. She obviously has the skills for that.

You know what I find funny...she is now doing what a typical pathological liar would do...she is bringing attention to the Wright controversy again to take the attention off her lying. This woman is seriously flawed and has some emotional issues. She doesnt realize this Wright thing is old news now...and Obama didnt hurt his country by going to his Church...but heavens only know if she got in office what she would lie about to all of us and the potential to do us harm. She needs to get some serious counseling. But then I suppose her and Bill have lied so much to the American people thru the years that they cant tell the truth from a lie.

Oh and some advise for you Pennsylvania voters...dont be fooled by her like the people of Ohio were about her stance on NAFTA. She really duped all of them and got them to vote for her. Oh well Ohio...now you know why you have no jobs. And if Pennsylvanians have any brains they will not vote for someone who took their jobs away.

I think this Bosnia story is in a twisted way is good for Hillary. It reminds everyone that she was there she was everywhere. Been there done that. Hillary looks good she has done more for Americans as First Lady then Bush ever could of as President!
The BO, Rev. Wright story will go down in the history books as what not to say about race
For BO, to say" Typical White person" saying his grandma made him cringe, but not his pastor! It's going to be the infamous" the pastor disaster" This story won't go away folks.

-- "Due to reports of snipers in the hills around the airstrip, we were forced to cut short an event on the tarmac with local children, though we did have time to meet them and their teachers and to learn how hard they had worked during the war to continue classes in any safe spot they could find," Clinton wrote.

"That is what she wrote in her book," Wolfson said. "That is what she has said many, many times and on one occasion she misspoke." --

Jocelyn and Michael in Michigan - We are so furious with Barack Obama at this point in time that we have both made a pact NOT to vote for him in November if he is the nominee for the Democrats. We've had enough of this absurdity. We VOTED. And this freshman rookie Senator from Illinois doesn't want our votes to count? To hell with him.

While everyone in the democratic party is arguing over trivial matters and rhetoric several key things are happening.

1. Members of the democratic party are being percieved as babies who can not even select an electable candidate.

2. McCain and the Republican party have been handed plenty of ammunition against either democratic candidate by the candidates themselves.

3. The economy is getting worse. Many of us are going to lose our jobs and our homes. The scarey thing is we have been so accustomed to prosperity that we will not know how to handle what is to come.

4. The death toll in Iraq is rising. This is very real, people are losing their loved ones. If this war continues many more will die. If the draft were reinstated (and it could ALWAYS be reinstated) possibly some of us on this post will die for this war.

I wish we would all fan away the smoke and look at the tangible facts that concern us all. Americans, both democrats and republicans of all races. We should base our decsisions on those facts and put pressure on our parties to choose a nominee based on the true issues.

Personally I don't care about politicians' credibility. They all lie, Hillary, McCain, and Obama are all guilty of it. They are all dirty, no candidate makes it to the presidential nomination with clean hands. They all have scandals. It's a harsh reality but it is true.

I care about getting an electable candidate that will and is capable of doing his or her best to get us out of the mess we are in now. So the question I ask myself is which candidate's mess is going to negatively effect his or her electability the least.

Heterosexual sex scandals, lobbying, and even having dirty low life associates generally do not cost candidates elections.

Telling tall tells generally would not cost a candidate an election.

Being racist has not cost former candidates elections.

Being in favor of strict gun control will kill a candidate's chances of becoming president.

Having the appearance of being an Anti American Muslim Socialist would definately kill a candidate's chances of being elected. (Remember John Kerry, he just looked unpatriotic and it cost him the presidency.)

As much as I wish Senator Obama would get elected in the general election the harsh reality is he won't. Many Reagan Democrats, and Moderate Republicans will never forget the Wright controversy and they will never listen to his sermons fully.

Hillary still has a chance even with her scandals and tall tells because she has the appearance of being a Christian patriot. However with both candidates fighting and our bickering people will just get tired of hearing her name and she may not win moderate voters.

McCain on the other hand will come out of this looking like a Prince. And if this bickering keeps going and people don't rally behind the lesser of three evils based on electibilty in November McCain will be our new President, The democrats will lose seats in the Senate and house, and Bush's policies will continue in the White House.

With the economy getting worse people are going to be angry with the deomcrats in the long run. They will see them as undecisive, weak leaders who threw the election away with both hands. A third presidential defeat will truly curb the party's power and influence.

This may seem trivial now but by this time next year we will all be crying about how bad things are, unfortunately we will have no one to blame but ourselves.

How on earth can this be considered "trivial"? The last major foreign policy,"misspoken" moment in politics as big as this one got us neck-deep in a war over some "overcompensated" claims of fantastical W.M.D.'s.

This isn't a game! No way do I want this person anywhere near the White House.

Sniper fire or no sniper fire, HRC will to sex up that "experienced commander in chief" CV. Frankly these big names have run out of ideas, they are fast running out of respectability and are fast running out of time.

I think this Bosnia story is in a twisted way is good for Hillary. It reminds everyone that she was there she was everywhere. Been there done that. Hillary looks good she has done more for Americans as First Lady then Bush ever could of as President!
The BO, Rev. Wright story will go down in the history books as what not to say about race
For BO, to say" Typical White person" saying his grandma made him cringe, but not his pastor! It's going to be the infamous" the pastor disaster" This story won't go away folks.

Posted by: Typical White Person | March 25, 2008 11:42 PM

NOT AS LONG AS WE HAVE TYPICAL WHITE PEOPLE LIKE YOU. JUST REMEMBER THE SUPREME COURT APPOINTMENTS UNDER MCCAIN.

Obama's efforts to connect to the Republican Party, specifically Bush, and Dick Chaney, of the Halliburton Company, dates back to the Presidents Grandfather, Prescott Bush, and indeed Chaney was once an executive officer of Halliburton.

The American military pounds Iraq with Artillary, bombs, and the like, destroying large sections of cities, and infra-structures, then Halliburton comes in to rebuild. Halliburton and Halliburton associated companies have raked in ten's of billions.

Obama is just like the BIG HALIBURTAN. Haliburton has contracted to build detention centers in the U.S. similiar to the one in Quantanammo Bay, Cuba. Halliburton does nothing to earn the Two Dollars for each meal an American Serviceman in Iraq eats.

Halliburton was scheduled to take control of the Dubai Ports in The United Arab Emiirate. The deal was canceled when Bush was unable to affect the transfer of the American Ports.

Now we see what some might suspect as similiar financial escapading from the Democrats.

Two years ago, Iraq's Ministry of Electricity gave a $50 million contract to a start-up security company - Companion- owned by now-indicted businessman (TONY REZKO) Tony Rezko and a onetime Chicago cop, Daniel T. Frawley, to train Iraqi power-plant guards in the United States. An Iraqi leadership change left the deal in limbo. Now the company, Companion Security, is working to revive its contract.
Involved along with Antoin "Tony" Rezco, long time friend and neighbor of Democratic Presidential hopeful Barack Obama, and former cop Daniel T. Frawley, is Aiham Alsammarae. Alsammarae was accused of financial corruption by Iraqi authorities and jailed in Iraq last year before escaping and returning here.

LIKE FATHER LIKE SON --
Recently, Obama's campaign staff have been vetted by the IRS to disclose his connection to the criminal money generating underworld. Besides, his connections to the REZCO MAFIA types, his up-coming tax fraud charges -- Obama needs to disclose why he is a MUSLIM "PATWANG-FWEEE" and disclose Obama's MUSLIM Farrakhan mob connection to Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan. Farrakhan and Chicago's Trinity United Church are trumpeting Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama as the second coming of the messiah. Obama should stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It's time to introduce this false, fake Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke "GLORK" Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek. He is MAD!!! --

OBAM YOU'RE NO JFK --

"GLORK" Obama looks like Alfred E. Newman: "Tales Calculated To Drive You." He is a MUSLIM "Glork" He's MAD!!! Alfred E. Neuman is the fictional mascot of Mad. The face had drifted through American pictography for decades before being claimed by Mad editor Harvey Kurtzman after he spotted it on the bulletin board in the office of Ballantine Books editor Bernard Shir-Cliff, later a contributor to various magazines created by Kurtzman.
Obama needs to disclose why he is a MUSLIM "PATWANG-FWEEE" and stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It's time to introduce this false, fake "GLORK" Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek.

Michelle Obama should be ashamed.

"GLORK" Michelle Obama should be ashamed of her separatist-racist connection to Farrakhan and Chicago's Trinity United Church trumpeting Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama as the second coming of the messiah. If Michelle Obama new what her husband -- the Hope-A-Dope, Fonster Monster -- Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama did in Harlem, she would wash her wide-open, Hus-suey loving MUSILM mouth out, with twenty-four (24) mule-team double-cross X-boX-BorraX. He is a MUSLIM "Glork" It's time to introduce this false, fake "GLORK" Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek. He's MAD!!!

The Apologia has arrived and once again the self-indicting, separatist-racist Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama, promises to heal the wounds of the world. The speech is the rude awakening of mass messianism of his campaign. Apologetically, Obama the MUSLIM double-cross X-boX-BorraX has an astonishingly empty two-prawn echelon explanation of his misjudgment.
In the first prawn: with regard to his connection to separatist-racist Rev. Wright; Obama summons voodoo and juju to express slavery as beginning and ending with the Rev. Wright.
In the second prawn: Obama's speech takes credit for Ashley's dream. A dream of unity Martin Luther King, Jr. borrowed from Ashley for his historic "I Have A Dream" speech. In Obama's speech, the connective bond Ashley, the elderly black man and Obama's grandmother share; represents Obama's self-indicting rise to the Harvard Yard. For Obama, the grand flag of language is the semi-fore of words, bestowed upon our nation by the messiah-alumni from Harvard. Obama's Swoon-Song Apologia to the nation represents a failed hymn -- a hymn that fails to heal the nation, repair the world, or make this time different than all the rest. Obama's speech is a brilliant failure.

TWP-You ARE absolutely correct about that-Hillary Clinton HAS been everywhere, she is known throughout the world, and is a known quantity that people respect, because they know what Bill Clinton did for the ECONOMY-AND THE REST OF THE WORLD REMEMBERS THAT, AND THAT ALONE, WHICH IS WHY BILL CLINTON IS SO HIGHLY ESTEEMED AND DESIRED AS A SPEAKER THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, PEOPLE WANT THAT PERSON WHO WROUGHT THAT MIRACLE OF LEAVING A BILLION PLUS SURPLUS IN THE US TREASURY AS HE LEFT, RAISING THE STANDARD OF LIVING FOR MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS AND THE POOR-SOMETHING WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DONE IN MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY.

People want more of that, and they know that Hillary Rodham Clinton can lead the country back on that road to fiscal health, although it will a hell of a lot harder after the unimaginable debt the US carries presently, and will continue to carry as a result of the war in Iraq.

As for Obama, I wouldn't vote for his disingenuous racist self for dogcatcher, the man is dangerously naive on foreign policy-I'll gladly vote for McCain if the Dem. Party is crazy enough to put Obama up as a candidate.

With all of the hoopla involving Barack Obama and his pastor, I think that we are forgetting some of the most profound articles of the constitution, Freedom of Speech and most importantly, The Separation of Church and State!
Separation of church and state is the political and legal idea that government and religion should be separate, and not interfere in each other's affairs.
In the United States, separation of church and state is often identified with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." The phrase "building a wall of separation between church and state" was written by the U.S. President Thomas Jefferson in a January 1, 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association

Thomas Jefferson says: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship...

We owe account to none other for our faith or our worship!..... WOW!.....that means that we can worship wherever or with whom ever we choose.....according Thomas Jefferson...

We can worship God, Jesus, Allah, Buddah, or Atheism, and it should not interfere or be an issue regarding our political experience and the potential to lead this country....

So why is the media crucifying Barack for being in his church for 20 years and not leaving?....
It's none of their business what Obama does on Sunday's in the church! It is a personal choice that we all have a right to worship or not to worship at anyplace with any congregation.....so let's move on!...

Chelsea Clinton was asked by a student yesterday at Butler University about the Monica Lewinsky affair and her family...she promptly answered the student that "it was none of her business!"....good for Chelsea!...she is right...it is personal!...

And guess what, Barack worship is personal, so why is the media, and Hillary Clinton commenting on his personal choice & place of worship.... everday of the week....it is really old news now...

SHAME on Hillary for bringing it up...she should have made the same statement as her daughter... "basically it is none of my business mr. reporter, this subject is between Mr. Obama and his personal choice"

James Madison says: "no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish enlarge, or affect their civil capacities"....

I wanted to apologize for misspeaking the other day when I claimed to be the Queen of England. What I meant was that with the beautiful day and a decent night's sleep, I felt like royalty. It just came out wrong.

Also, when I posted last week that in my spare time I had discovered the cure for all cancers (a little lemon juice mixed with pulverized oregano), I just misspoke. What I really meant was that honey-lemon tea feels great when you have a cold. I don't know, it must have been a string of typos that just by coincidence formed correctly spelled words in valid grammatical arrangement. I have not, in fact, discovered the cure for cancer.

Finally, it was a misstatement when I declared that I won the National League Most Valuable Player award while manning shortstop for the Nats last year. What I meant to say is that I was once the second best hitter on my apartment building's softball team. I regret the misstatement.

I hope you realize that I say many things during the course of a day, or a year, and as such there are bound to be misstatements and misspeakings. I trust this will not effect your opinion of my honesty and forthrightness.

Yet another idiot who bases his vote on the possibility of a Supreme Court appointment.

Here's some trivia: Chief Justice Warren, widely considered the head of the most liberal bench was a Eisenhower appointee, a Republican. Most of the "left" side of the bench today were Republican appointees (Stevens - Ford; Souter - Bush 1). O'Connor was also a Republican appointee and considered a swing vote as is Kennedy today.

My point is, it makes no sense to base a vote on 1. The possibility that a current Justice will retire; 2. The possibiilty that the appointee will turn out redically on the right; and 3. The possibility that a certain case will come before the court and that that particular Justice will rule the way you don't want them to.

I am always amazed that people actually base their vote on this "six degrees of seperation" type ideal.

So Hillary did lie about the danger involved in her Bosnia trip. She wanted to impress. Fair enough. And I have to hear from Karl Rove about Obama's lies.

1) Obama said his parents met at the Selma march, Reality: he was born 4 years before that.

2) Obama said he was a constitutional law professor Reality: Just didn't happen.

3) Obama said he spoke fluent Indonesian as a child Reality: His teachers there say no

4) Obama said he was involved in community asbestos and housing project for the poor Reality: Didn't happen and this was the basis for Obama and Michelle's claims that he was a community activist in Chicago. Which both he and Michelle Obama have been saying this year.

5) Obama said in his book that he received his racial awakening at age nine reading a Life/Ebony Magazine story about a black man who was scarred trying to dye his skin white Reality: Didn't happen. Both Life and Ebony say there was no such article.

So the Lie Meter is 5 Obama 1 Hillary. AND, Hillary admitted the untruth; Obama has yet to admit ANYTHING!!

We could continue in this way, Tit for Tat or we can ask who is best qualified.Hillary Clinton is courageous (regardless of her exaggeration), knowledgeable, tough and she is widely acknowledged as a policy expert. I am for her as I see she has the chops to do the job. Obama is a terrific speaker and his policy chops are thin as is his good friend Duval Patrick's (read the article). He is dazzling and not much else. The books he brags about writing have falsehoods (as listed above). What can a voter do? Either he is qualified or he is not. And all the diatribes and trash talking will not help us decide. What is worse, if he should be the nominee, the right wing will cream him in November. REALITY CHECK!!!!

Part of my point about Obama's lies is that THE MEDIA DOESN'T REPORT THIS STUFF!!! I have to hear it from Karl Rove!!

No wonder they won in 2000 and 2004.

The media really is in the TANK for Obama. And I really think they think they are HELPING him win. What is this? Idiot time? He will lose in November because Rove and friends will not be constrained as Hillary is being constrained. Another REALITY CHECK!!!

"The choice is an easy one after all.
Hillary represents the politics of the past, and seems to support John Mcain who babbles incorrectly about war, while confused about who is what and what is where. After the past 7 years it must be clear that it matters little if you have a Bush or a Mcain, because some one (like Hillary) will work in the back ground and tell ya what to say. (like Sen. Liberman ...perhaps?)

They are all afraid that a citizen who is not one of the good olde group (like Sen.Obama) would even dare to challange the status-quo and upset the "Crime Family" foundation that the Republicans and their neo-con Demorcrats like Hillary ... have been the front store dummies for ... years.

Bill Clinton (Bush's favorite Democrat) can't seem to shut his mouth and re-defines his legacy for us who believed in him. I saw him on a New York city television just after the '04 election when he (while flirting shameslessly with the female reporter) was interviewed about the past election and he says "Why am I the only person who seems to be able to say we were lucky to have two fine choices in Sen Kerry or President Bush?"

I was flabbergasted as he went on ... "the country would be greatly served if either of these men were selected by the people".
We have been NAFTAD , and Neo-Conned right in to war by the Democrats as well as Bush and his goosestepping friends on both sides of the isle. I for one will never forget Ms.Clinton's steadfast support of the war for over 5 years.....

We need change.....!

Look at your choices . I see only one possibility for that change this year.

Ms. Clinton go home and take that yelling old finger pointing cheating liar home with you."

A recent statement in the Times from Clinton's speechwriter and chief of staff about that trip makes me wonder if you are being balanced, fact-checker. If what they say is true (and clearly they are biased), the preparations for landing in Bosnia were quite stressful and there was certainly fear of snipers on the ground.

This seems like important context and doesn not look like the picture you presented above. Given that there are those in the US (many who post here) who would LOVE to believe that Clinton would fully make up a story like this out of nothing, it seems important to show the whole picture.

"We flew in a C-17 cargo plane from Germany to Bosnia precisely because it was capable of steep descents and ascents into and out of areas of conflict. We were issued flak jackets on the plane before landing in Tuzla and were told the tarmac ceremony might be canceled or curtailed due to sniper fire from the surrounding hillsides. The first lady and Chelsea Clinton were moved to the armored cockpit for the landing. Armored vehicles were placed around the tarmac, and Apache helicopters hovered overhead."